So is Paul Krugman now under the bus?
Are we now going to hear how Paul Krugman is an out of touch, elitist, tenured Princeton professor who is in cahoots with the 1%, doing the bidding of the billionaires, or that he's a DLC, corporate funded hack.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/opinion/varieties-of-voodoo.html?_r=0
On Wednesday four former Democratic chairmen and chairwomen of the president’s Council of Economic Advisers — three who served under Barack Obama, one who served under Bill Clinton — released a stinging open letter to Bernie Sanders and Gerald Friedman, a University of Massachusetts professor who has been a major source of the Sanders campaign’s numbers. The economists called out the campaign for citing “extreme claims” by Mr. Friedman that “exceed even the most grandiose predictions by Republicans” and could “undermine the credibility of the progressive economic agenda.”
That’s harsh. But it’s harsh for a reason.
The claims the economists are talking about come from Mr. Friedman’s analysis of the Sanders economic program. The good news is that this isn’t the campaign’s official assessment; the bad news is that the Friedman analysis has been highly praised by campaign officials.
cut
And there’s an even larger issue here: Good ideas don’t have to be sold with fairy dust.
Mr. Sanders is calling for a large expansion of the U.S. social safety net, which is something I would like to see, too. But the problem with such a move is that it would probably create many losers as well as winners — a substantial number of Americans, mainly in the upper middle class, who would end up paying more in additional taxes than they would gain in enhanced benefits.
By endorsing outlandish economic claims, the Sanders campaign is basically signaling that it doesn’t believe its program can be sold on the merits, that it has to invoke a growth miracle to minimize the downsides of its vision. It is, in effect, confirming its critics’ worst suspicions.
more
= new reply since forum marked as read
....months,
, but it's okay. He's in fine company.
stumbled upon some bias........... 
By telling me that she does not SEEM eager to change it to YOU, and by calling me naive...
Bye bye
than I do. Everyone is entitled to their own political opinion - no matter how much I disagree with it. 
Bill Moyers published: The New York Times Invents Left-Leaning Economists to Attack Bernie Sanders by Dean Baker
While there are undoubtedly many left-of-center economists who have serious objections to the proposals Sanders has put forward, there are also many who have publicly indicated support for them. Remarkably, none of those economists were referenced in this article. In fact, to make its case on left-of-center economists’ views, The New York Times even presented the comments of Ezra Klein, who is neither an economist nor a liberal, by his own identification.
It also misrepresented the comments of Jared Bernstein (a personal friend), implying that they were criticisms of Sanders’ program. In fact his comments were addressed to the analysis of Sanders’ proposals by Gerald Friedman, an economist at the University of Massachusetts who is not affiliated with the Sanders campaign.
Friedman is not affiliated with the Sanders campaign. lol
ECONOMISTS IN SUPPORT OF A $15 U.S. MINIMUM WAGE AS OF 2020
170 ECONOMISTS AND FINANCIAL EXPERTS IN FAVOR OF SEN. SANDERS’ WALL ST. REFORMS
Politifact Confirms Bernie Sanders’ Healthcare Plan Will SAVE Every American Family $1,200/Year
As I said in my post at the top, this was a hurried political hit job by Clinton. It's hardly conclusive and hilarious that they went after a guy who is not with Sanders campaign (I didn't know that).
and you are propagating the disinformation.
According to Galbraith, Friedman employed conventional methods of analysis to arrive at his results. Friedman is also a Clinton supporter, by the way. lol! Further, Galbraith has been unable to find any documentation on the methods by which these four CEA folk arrived at their rebuttal of Friedman's work. Which would seem to mean there was precious little, if any, analysis behind their pronouncement. While they claim rigor, and trumpet a conclusion, they have not presented their material ... which is very unusual to say the least.
Krugman did not vet their work ... he just ran with a story for obvious political purposes. And that, my friend, is damning.
I am attaching Galbraith's letter for your reference ... but I doubt it will alter the debate. I find it ironic that Clinton people will claim Sanders people believe in rainbow farting unicorns while propagating crap like this and presenting it as established fact. In the mean time, independent thinkers have seen a pattern that has emerged from the Clinton camp that suggests an eagerness to indulge in fact free assertion. Ms. Clinton may have eked out a narrow victory in Nevada, but her own reputation, as well as that of her campaign and her surrogates, is not coming out of it undamaged by their own words and deeds.
J. K. Galbraith's Response to CEA
Trav
Come on ya'll and join us under the bus. We are having a great time!
