Abstract: Krugman speaks out of many sides of his mouth depending on what economic ‘facts’ the left-liberals need to isolate to grab and hold power. He now recommends the Raghuram Rajan version of Islamic Banking, following the trendy track of president Obama as he appeases Somali pirate and kisses the S. A. King’s hand.[1] Islamic Banking is a back-door scheme for an ideologically rigid government to wrestle control of the private sector from capitalists. Krugman attempts to redact history by placing his new economic hero in the role of Grand Predictor of the Crash. It is apparent that Krugman will say or do anything to give government control over economies and fulfill his Soviet Dreams that were crushed by capitalism.

The Islamic Banking System is complicated and includes strict rules on sharing profits by both the bank and the barrower. This system is in place because Islam has failed to produce societies who can provide enough food for their victims. Here, the interest rates and other charges and fees must float according to the balance sheets of the corporations who barrow. This is a phony and transparent way to avoid the strict tenets of Sharia where usury is not permitted. This is a sham and a joke, but does offer the opportunity for leftists to operate banks according to their own warped social principles if they can select a few points from this theatre.

We depend upon Marxism and Islam to be the guide posts to the economic latrines. Without them, we would have some real competition in the world. Let us hope both survive so our enemies can continue to squabble and fumble in economic destitution. Let them  have their own ways.

Preamble:

The New York Times—aka the Walter Duranty Papers [2] has few goals for their paper and this narrow list consists of: [1] apologizing for Communism, [2] propping up losers like Al Gore and his phony EcoNazism[3] or [3] celebrating AIDS and [4] hatching new lies so as to engorge government with honest taxpayer’s money.  Today, we must add another trendy item: [5] The urgent need for Islamic Banking[4].

The crew at the bankrupt NYT daily struggle to reinvent Marxism as a new-fangled and magical solution to achieve a great society and can apply their wondrous dreams to any problem along with the proper taxes of course. But, we always need a new twist to entice the ignoranti and True Believers to the edge of the Snake Pit for their reward French Revolution style. These people are “intellectuals”—they conjure up novel ways to grunt and grab your money. They have a new paradigm for us derived from third world:[5] Tax and spend and explain the new path forward with Islamic Banking.

To structure such freak show parlor tricks, they employ ideological stooges who turn the cranks of the old rusty socialist propaganda machines while offering solace and stolen wealth to losers so as to attract votes. One of their most proficient propaganda chuckers is the resident igNoble Leechette[6][7][8][9], one Paul Krugman, who has monotonously inculcated us with his politically-inspired although reason-deficient insights on recessions and depressions. It seems that he tortures us again with another round of explanations how big government will solve any and all problems.

He begins this episode with his own boring history about hisself:

“Thirty-plus years ago, when I was a graduate student in economics,[10]…. In the years that followed, of course, banking became anything but boring… Before 1930, banking was an exciting industry featuring a number of larger-than-life figures… But finance lost its glamour when the banking system collapsed during the Great Depression…

[Credits to FDR follow]:… Strange to say, this era of boring banking was also an era of spectacular economic progress for most Americans… [He omits 9 years of depression and a full year’s GDP wasted on trying to rescue Europe from their madness]

[An attack on Reagan now begins]: After 1980, however, as the political winds shifted, many of the regulations on banks were lifted — and banking became exciting again. Debt began rising rapidly, eventually reaching just about the same level relative to G.D.P. as in 1929…[We cannot read one of his fairy tales without  hearing about Ronald Reagan. This is all crusty and emotional revenge for RR’s audacity when he destroyed the USSR.]

[Praise for an unknown]: Only a few people warned that this supercharged financial system might come to a bad end. Perhaps the most notable Cassandra was Raghuram Rajan of the University of Chicago, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, who argued at a 2005 conference that the rapid growth of finance had increased the risk of a “catastrophic meltdown.” But other participants in the conference, including Lawrence Summers, now the head of the National Economic Council, ridiculed Mr. Rajan’s concerns…Part of the problem is that boring banking would mean poorer bankers, and the financial industry still has a lot of friends in high places. But it’s also a matter of ideology: Despite everything that has happened, most people in positions of power still associate fancy finance with economic progress.”[11]-- Making Banking Boring by Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published: April 9, 2009 [Emphasis and editorial comments are  mine in all quotes.]

The point of today’s screed:

Raghuram Govind Rajan,[12][13] our current hero must now be acclaimed the new guiding light in world of finance. In 7,000 years of commerce, he suddenly discovered the guiding star and now bestows his wisdom upon the financial world. He was not the only one to predict a financial crash based on phony credit options extended to people who could not afford to pay their debts or other government financial follies. Nouriel Roubini and Ambrose Evans-Prichard made more accurate and convincing cases. So did George Bush. So did anybody who criticized leftist deficit spending.

From Krugman’s past screeds:

“… Many economists, myself included[14], are calling for a very large fiscal expansion to keep the economy from going into free fall. Others, however, worry about the burden that large budget deficits will place on future generations.”[15]-- Deficits and the Future by Paul Krugman Op-Ed Columnist Published: December 1, 2008    [Emphasis is mine in all quotes. This link references quotes in this essay unless otherwise indicated.]

We don’t have to worry about deficits!

“But the deficit worriers have it all wrong. Under current conditions, there’s no trade-off between what’s good in the short run and what’s good for the long run; strong fiscal expansion would actually enhance the economy’s long-run prospects.”

From 2003 he bashes Greenspan for the deficit:

“Two years ago you [directed at Alan Greenspan] acted as George W. Bush's enabler; you share part of the blame for our plunge into deficit. But now the situation is truly dire. If you waffle now, and take the easy way out, your reputation -- and the country's finances -- will quickly pass the point of no return.

In your initial remarks you more or less acknowledged the grim fiscal outlook. As your discussion of ''accrual'' accounting made clear, you know that if the federal budget took into account the future liabilities of Social Security and Medicare -- as it should -- it wouldn't show the ''modest'' deficits the White House talks about; it would show a government deep in the red.

Moreover, since you advocate accrual accounting, you obviously realize that the ratio of debt to G.D.P. is a highly misleading number. Properly measured, the U.S. fiscal system is already ''unstable'' -- and the new Bush proposals would quickly push it past what you called the ''point of no return.''”[16]-- On the Second Day, Atlas Waffled By Paul Krugman Published: February 14, 2003

Gee, now deficits don’t matter when Democrats want to wield some power. It seems deficit to G.D.P. ratios are the European Union’s metrics on participation in the EU. Does Krugman criticize the Europeans? Well, perhaps as they don’t have an Islamic Banking as yet. The EU would not take us in because of our very high deficit to G.D.P. ratio, not to exceed 4% in the EU.  After Krugman’s lies and twisted rhetoric are disclosed, we get to the central point of his current screed:

A translation of the above:

We need to look at a few points here and see if we can pry off the scabs from this carcass.

[1] Krugman and his liberals will do and say anything to get power over the people.  They can choose a topic like deficits and show that only the right was wrong to engage in deficit spending. When liberals do so there is no penalty or abuse.

[2] The New Vision of Islamic Banking[17] is based on Sharia Law that prohibits interest on loans [usury or interest in our infidel language] and Riba [18]in Arabic. Certain business practices or the production of certain products violate the narrow and bigoted religious and tribal concept and they are “considered contrary” to principles of Islam (Haraam, forbidden).” This would mean dildos, narcotics, wine from Napa Valley, religions objects and organizations 0f the infidel and other items like Scotch Whiskey, gay bath houses and workshops on rimming and probably eye makeup. This partial list would tear the bottom out of California’s society, such as it is,[19]  and form the basis for some summary executions for degeneracy dictated by the Koran.

[3] The singular point of interest in this mélange of social sewage is that Krugman and his parasites need some phony excuse to force American businesses to comply with leftist standards of conduct and outlook. There is no reason to attack sodomy, perversions, drug addiction and other wonderful facets of liberal society here as Krugman and his associates can pick and choose, like from  a Greenwich Village  sidewalk smorgasbord, from the essential elements needed to control the masses. Thus the production of guns would be ‘against leftist principles,’ but drug addiction, tax evasion and sodomizing children would not.

[4] In Shariah[20] driven banking, we find: “floating rate interest loans. The floating rate of interest is pegged to the company's individual rate of return. Thus the bank's profit on the loan is equal to a certain percentage of the company's profits. Once the principal amount of the loan is repaid, the profit-sharing arrangement is concluded. This practice is called Musharaka. Further, Mudaraba is venture capital funding of an entrepreneur who provides labor while financing is provided by the bank so that both profit and risk are shared. Such participatory arrangements between capital and labor reflect the Islamic view that the borrower must not bear all the risk/cost of a failure, resulting in a balanced distribution of income and not allowing lender to monopolize the economy.”[21] That is a hot one. If the government runs the banks then the government can participate in the profit of the company and adjust interest rates according to their religions or political nostrums. What control!!

Krugman’s new hero gives us the following from his book:

“The book [Saving Capitalism from the Capitalists is a non-fiction book by Raghuram Rajan and Luigi Zingales of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business..ed] is neither a defense of pure laissez-faire capitalism, nor is it an anti-capitalist polemic. Instead, the authors develop the following arguments in the book:”[22]

[1] The free market is the form of economic organization most beneficial to human society and for improving the human condition.

Then, why not Marxism??

[2] Free markets can flourish over the long run only when government plays a visible role in determining the rules that govern the market and supporting it with the proper infrastructure.

Big government.

[3]Government, however, is subject to influence by organized private interests

Incumbent private interests, therefore, may be able to leverage the power of governmental regulation to protect their own economic position at the expense of the public interest by repressing the same free market through which they originally achieved success.

Incoherent. Something lies buried beneath the notion of “Incumbent private interests” This probably is an oblique reference to the ACLU, Black Panthers or ACORN.

[4] Thus, society must act to "save capitalism from the capitalists" -- i.e. take appropriate steps to protect the free market from powerful private interests who would seek to impede the efficient function of free markets, entrench themselves, and thereby reduce the overall level of economic opportunity in society.

Exposure of the Lies and Fluff:

The fun part of this fluff is the notion that our current ‘government’ is anything other than a pack of sordid parasites and that they could make equitable social decisions devoid of corruption, sleaze and malice. We can also look at the sordid history of Islam with their tribalism, wars, beheadings, religious schism and psychotic madrasas systems that teach hate against the infidel. We can also look at the vicious dictators like Saddam Hussein, the Young Turks, Muhammad Hosni Mubarak [23]of Egypt, Muammar Kadafi[24] and other disgusting persons who embrace Islam for a vision of what they offer. The Islamic nations are all dictatorships abounding with massive ignorance and severe poverty and now Krugman suggests that we barrow[25] some of these aspects to control our capitalists who have ruined Marx and others and need to be put down using other political theories.

That makes sense to a liberal. Just go out and grab any phony economic and governmental plan that offers a chance to get power. Who cares how many people die?

Some questions:

[a] What happened to Marxism –an equally phony economic system that failed miserably? Are we to drop Karl for some equally phony economic theory that is hampered by the religions rigidity of Islam?

[b] Are we now to lose the opportunity to hug a commie[26] after reading his new and wonderful way to destroy our industry and banks?

Conclusion:

Krugman gropes for any alternative to capitalism that might offer the leftists some hope of gaining power. Marxism was a joke and Islam is no better in economic terms. Such a preposterous notion that some religious-driven banking system might not be corrupted and restructured for use by infidels like Krugman is too amusing to put aside.  Perhaps he thinks we should trust Nancy Pelosi or Backside Barney.[27]I hope the Walter Duranty Papers [28] actually survive bankruptcy so we can continue to expose this crap and have a good laugh. This is opera buffa at its best.  It doesn’t get much funnier than this.  Krugman needs a pointed hat and some feathers to beat this circus act in the future.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com