Jesus, the word “slashed” appears exactly once in the column and Boudreaux still fucks up the attribution. And averaging 2003-2012 is intentionally misleading. Can you think of anything (hint: real expensive) that was ‘off budget’ that went ‘on budget’? Hmm?

June 4, 2012 § 2 Comments

Elsewhere his column, though, Mr. Krugman suggests that he’s thinking back only to 2009.  It’s true that such projected spending for 2012 will be down by just under five percent from its 2009 level, but this statistic is largely an artifact of the huge – nearly 11 percent in a single year – spike in such spending that occurred in 2009 over 2008.  Compared to the average of such annual spending for the ten-year period 2003-2012, spending in 2012 is higher by 5.6 percent.  More significantly, compared to the average of such annual spending for the decade leading up to the downturn (1999-2008), such spending in 2012 is higher by 17 percent.*

Mr. Krugman misleads your readers by asserting that real total government spending today, adjusted for population growth, has been “slashed.”

http://cafehayek.com/2012/06/on-krugman-on-spending.html

Advertisements

§ 2 Responses to Jesus, the word “slashed” appears exactly once in the column and Boudreaux still fucks up the attribution. And averaging 2003-2012 is intentionally misleading. Can you think of anything (hint: real expensive) that was ‘off budget’ that went ‘on budget’? Hmm?

  • Ah, another Krugman in Wonderland op-ed. It’s sad to watch this guy degenerate from a well-respected economist to a partisan political hack. But anyway, it seems that both these fellows cherry pick the data to back up their points as economists are inclined to do.

  • Seems? You don’t know? Krugman gets a *lot* of scrutiny to everything he writes. Boudreaux doesn’t.

What?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Jesus, the word “slashed” appears exactly once in the column and Boudreaux still fucks up the attribution. And averaging 2003-2012 is intentionally misleading. Can you think of anything (hint: real expensive) that was ‘off budget’ that went ‘on budget’? Hmm? at - Invisible Backhand -.

meta

%d bloggers like this: