Quote:
Originally Posted by 20000miles  Let's focus on this part, as it's the most relevant. Does a man who is truly anti-bubble use the phrase "needs to create a housing bubble". Note the use of the word "need" here, appearing to indicate absolute necessity. |
No, it is clearly
subjective necessity. From Greenspan's point of view, it is a necessity, not from Krugman's. That is limpidly clear from his writing. Let's look again:
"To fight this recession
the Fed needs more than a snapback;
it (not "I", not "you", not "we" but the third person, the other, the entity who is neither speaking nor being spoken to) needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, (note this clause, because it changes the meaning from the one Miles wants you to believe to the actual meaning) as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble (it's not even Krugman's words, he's quoting another man's opinion without supporting it)."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 20000miles This appears to be the crux of the matter. |
The crux of the matter is lies and truth and the meaning of words. Your argument cannot hold unless you manage to rewrite the dictionary and grammar of English.
Quote:
|
But Ok, let's assume that this wasn't advocacy of a bubble, and PK was merely quoting another guy. Where is the slamming of this point of view?
|
He already called the bubble mania "irrational" as well as using the epithet "bubble" to refer to the rising price of houses. There is the slamming. Although merely to quote another person's opinion of the desires of Alan Greenspan does not equate to demanding that Greenspan's desires be granted.
Quote:
|
Vote now, folks, lines close at 6pm.
|
You might be able to get a majority of
P.ie voters to declare that JM Keynes is a pork ciabatta from Islamabad, but that doesn't make it so.
The issue is: were you lying about the simple everyday use of the English language that Krugman used, and the way it is correctly interpreted by English speakers. Regardless of the votes of people on an internet site, the relevant rules of English grammar are going to remain the same for many generations, and no vote that you could rig up will change that.