Paul Krugman blogs about how Keynesians are the best, how “anti-Keynesians” are irrational, refuse to acknowledge facts and evidence contrary to their views, replete with the usual characterizations designed to allow him to dismiss views contrary to his own without ever having to deal with their merits, etc. He concludes:
Many economists would like to believe that we’re having a reasonable, civilized discussion, rather than dealing with denialism and bad faith.
I left the comment:
You mean like your implausible denials that you advocated a Fed policy of lowering interest rates to create a housing bubble and your bad faith of refusing to acknowledge how this illustrates your economic ideology fundamentally bankrupt?
See my book, Ron Paul vs. Paul Krugman: Austrian vs. Keynesian economics in the financial crisis for the documentation of Krugman’s miserable record.
