Ron Paul vs. Paul Krugman

Forget the recent Ron Paul vs. Paul Krugman debate on Bloomberg TV.  It was more a he said / he said with neither side adding anything new to their talking points.  But let's look at what these two predicted a decade ago. First, Ron Paul:

http://www.newsmax.com/DougWead/ron-paul-churchill-tea/2011/08/10/id/406863

"Like all artificially created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing."Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary, but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts." - Ron Paul, September 10, 2003

This is what the esteemed Paul Krugman prescribed:


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/02/opinion/dubya-s-double-dip.html

"To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble." - Paul Krugman, August 2, 2002

Now, ask yourself:  who got it right--the obstetrician/gynaecologist from Texas or the Nobel Laureate in Economics from Princeton?  In fact, who got it completely wrong?


To Professor Krugman and your Ivy League cronies who completely missed the boat:  go screw yourself.  You and your colleagues in the ivory tower have already screwed the global economy.  Do us a favor and shut your pie-hole.