Other Schools of Thought

Fed economists — like mainstream macroeconomics in general — are intellectually bankrupt and clueless at best or dishonest propagandists at worst.

Nowhere in this document or in successive drafts by Mason and Thomas Jefferson do we read words that could lead the reader to conclude that the federal government ought to care for its citizens or that we ought to look out for one another or that a central government ought to violate our individual natural rights to freedom, independence, and property to achieve the absurdity of mandatory equal access, equal price, equal quantity, and equal quality of health care for all.

The whole idea is just plain dumb, not to mention incredibly ill-timed.

The two haute couture lines creating the most buzz are "Laissez-Faire," by Ludwig von Mises, and  "Après Moi le Déluge" by British export, John Keynes.

The requirements for wealth creation are simple: a favorable business climate free from overbearing regulation and a belief that the earnings from hard work and risk taking will not be confiscated by a government bent on the redistribution of income.

We have rejected the enrichments of a healthy capitalism in favor of an impoverishing government-run fascism. We have resurrected another great depression — and made America the crisis leader of the world, instead of, what it once was, the beacon for world prosperity.

As the late 20th century's disastrous experiments with totalitarianism and interventionism showed, Mises's criticisms have most certainly stood the test of time.

The mathematical method must be rejected not only on account of its barrenness. It is an entirely vicious method, starting from false assumptions and leading to fallacious inferences."

As it turns out, Krugman's apologists shouldn't demand more context for his notorious quotes, since it only shines even more light on how confused and backward he is as an economist.

The Keynesians have no leg to stand on.