[msickmeier]

Searching through the internet, I came across a picture of Paul Krugman posing as a TV weatherman viewing over a hurricane coming along the east coast. In the picture he says; “and we have some wonderful stimulus heading through the southeast.” (link below)

That got me to think about all the global warming alarmist who are claiming the recent spade of hurricanes and tornados are caused by global warming. So, by this logic,

if capitalism and/or economic development is causing global warming

…and global warming is causing more hurricanes and tornados

…and hurricanes and tornadoes are actually an economic “stimulus”

…wouldn’t this be a prosperous cycle? Our economic production, causes devastation, which is actually an economic “plus.” Wouldn’t this be a good thing?

I am being silly of course, but the logic doesn’t seem to coincide.

Thoughts?

(Krugman Picture)
http://www.secretsofthefed.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/krugman-weather.jpg

[aybartlett]

Hilarious!

Well yes. Many phony economists literally call for a decrease in productivity as our cure. This is one of many inherent problems in Keynesian logic. It is the broken window fallacy. Economics in One Lesson refutes this. There are unintended consequences that Krugman refuses to acknowledge.

If I had $1 million……..

1. With a Hurricane devastating my factory, I have to spend it to rebuild.

2. Without a Hurricane devastating my factory I have $1 million to invest for growth, or I can buy three Ferrari 458’s.

Without a hurricane, society has more stuff. I’d really like to see someone on their side of the argument practice what they preach.

(imagining Krugman setting his home ablaze and gloating about how wonderful this will be for the economy)

[Author]

Posts