Comments for New Economic Study: If People Don't Eat Chicken, They Will Starve to Death at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 10 out of 10 comments http://www.cepr.net Tue, 21 May 2013 11:20:40 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-2700 I like your theory. It explains a lot about Holmes/Watson too (both old and new), which, while not incest, always has turn-century-homophobia giving it a charge. Even if the writer doesn't choose to deal with the question of transgression directly, there's [url=http://www.watcheslux.com/paul-picot-watches.html]Paul Picot replica watches[/url] always going to be a reason that H&W can't be open about their relationship. - sean.waches Tue, 07 Sep 2010 17:08:24 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1801 Are we better off? It does depend on who we are? Cue bono? We, the working class, are not better off in the U S of A. It can be argued that had the rescue been focused on creating jobs and credit directly to working people while closing down the non-productive financial institutions, we would be much better off now. - Scott ffolliott Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:47:59 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1797 Too bad Baker wasn't on last night's PBS Newshour. They featured former McCain adviser Mark Zandi and even more conservative economist, John Taylor to discuss this -- as if that were the universe of opinion on the subject. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec10/economy_07-29.html - leo Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:55:35 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1795 I think their point is that, although you may agree or disagree with the exact path the intervention took, it worked. Sure, there were mistakes. There are always mistakes. Were there mistakes in the Allied response to WWII? Of course, lots of them. Were the Allies in WWII still better off fighting back instead of doing nothing? Of course they were. - Anonymous Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:54:44 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1794 It does look like he's carrying water for someone in this instance. - Quiddity Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:14:19 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1793 [i]Suppose as an alternative counterfactual, we let the market do its work. [/i] Maybe I just don't get it, but isn't that the equivalent of doing nothing? It seems a more apt counterfactual would be Roubini's idea: nationalize the banks. Then you'd have the choice of chicken (TARP), beef (Nationalize), or nothing (let the market do everything). - misterxrobto Fri, 30 Jul 2010 03:47:11 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1790 This "study" appears on Moody's site and was presumably sponsored by them. It's one thing if Moody's puts out self-serving hackery, but why do academics like Blinder participate? I would think they would avoid making their ownership by Wall Street quite as obvious as this. - skeptonomist Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:11:06 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1789 Excellent post. But these are very Serious economists and who will argue with them--who didn't support TARP? Paul Krugman sure did, so did DeLong...and for the same reasons that B&Z conclude that the TARP worked--it was better than nothing. So not only will the media treat it as serious analysis, so will top Democratic economists. (Dems voted for the TARP) - tinbox Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:56:24 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1788 I'm not sure Blinder/Zandi are trying to defend the exact choice/blend of interventions. Rather the main point seems to be that it took massive intervention by the Fed, Treasury, stimulus etc to avoid a far more serious recession, and that without SOME intervention of large magnitude, it would have been much worse. That's a different point from arguing this was the best choice/blend of intervention options. - Scarecrow Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:46:25 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/new-economic-study-if-people-dont-earn-chicken-they-will-starve-to-death#comment-1787 The implicit counterfactual is to alternate counterfactual As concentration of wealth is to trickle down wealth As golden parachute is to free puke bag This is Captain Blinder and Co-pilot Zandi, we're going to crash land because credit is not handy We're collecting wallets on behalf of TARP, put your heads between your knees as the plane we depart With the only two parachutes, to save the golden geese, to lay some more eggs, even if you're deceased There's only one counterfactual, either chicken or nothing, so fork it over now and pray for our survival, lest you end up eating cake at the KFC revival - izzatzo Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:39:24 +0100