The Conspiracy to Keep You Poor and Stupid is a trademark of Donald L. Luskin

Latest
Media Infiltrations:

Republicans and the Populist Temptation
Wall Street Journal
February 9, 2010
Why Taxing Stock Trades Is a Really Bad Idea
Wall Street Journal
January 6, 2010

Krugman Truth Squad logo, courtesy Tom Miller, Atomic Art: admin@atomicart.com

Peter Sellers and Peter Bull in ''Dr. Strangelove'' Columbia Pictures, 1964 -- Click to order!

"What has been your worst blogging experience?
Donald Luskin."
-- Brad DeLong

"That's a guy who actually stalks me on the Web and once stalked me personally."
-- Paul Krugman

"I'm saying this...guy's a jerk."
-- Charlie Gasparino

What I'm reading:
cover
The Happy Body
Aniela and Jerzy Gregorek

What I'm listening to:
cover
Langley Schools Music Project

What I'm watching:
cover
Star Trek

What I'm playing:
cover
Speed Racer

Order these from Amazon.com
at Amazon's normal low prices...
and a fraction of your order goes
to help support this site.
Thanks!

Thanks to Irwin Chusid, public editor.

Copyright 2002 thru 2009
Donald L. Luskin
don-at-luskin-dot-net
All rights reserved.
"The Conspiracy to
Keep You Poor and Stupid"
and "Krugman Truth Squad"
are trademarks of
Donald L. Luskin
www.poorandstupid.com

Logo by Tommy Carnase 1995

"The road is cleared," said Galt.
"We are going back to the world."
He raised his hand
and over the desolate earth
he traced in space
the sign of the dollar.

From Atlas Shrugged
by Ayn Rand

From each as they choose,
to each as they are chosen.

From Anarchy, State and Utopia
by Robert Nozick

"there is some shit I will not eat"

From i sing of olaf glad and big
by e. e. cummings


In Association with Amazon.com

Powered by Blogger Pro™

Chronicle of the Conspiracy
Join us as we discover, document, expose and challenge the bad people, the bad institutions and the bad ideas that stand in the way of wealth creation -- and show you how to fight back!

Saturday, April 18, 2009

KUDLOW REPLAY   Here's the YouTube video of Friday's appearance.


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 2:30 PM | link  


Friday, April 17, 2009

SIBELIUS FLUNKS MATH   Or, at least, my DC-insider friend "Mick Danger" thinks our new Secretary of Health ought to.
Here's an eye-opener.
...Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, now the nominee for secretary of Health and Human Services, proposed using $303 million of the state’s $440 million in Medicaid stimulus funding to balance the state budget.
So, as Governor, Sebelius got $440 million and spent approximately 68% on other programs? Golly, that's a bigger problem than Tom Daschle neglecting to pay income taxes on a car service.

It goes to the integrity of how the public money gets spent, or, misspent. It's all so predictable -- rush big spending bills through Congress without reading them and big mistakes get made.

Somebody go wake up Grassley. Tell him to get off the AIG suicide watch and get on top of this now. Why should someone who diverts 68% of "emergency" Medicaid funds in one state be promoted to watch over all 50?


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 12:40 PM | link  

A NEW FORM OF ECONOMIC STIMULUS?   From the Wall Street Journal's "Heard on the Street" feature, the once-legendary column that has become a joke, even without headlines like this:
Spanish Fly in ECB Ointment

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 9:59 AM | link  


Monday, April 13, 2009

KUDLOW REPLAY   Here's the YouTube video of Monday's hit.


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 11:46 PM | link  

WHY DOES DELONG HAVE TO LIE? TWICE!   When he writes pompous letters to the New York Times criticizing it for its economics coverage that ocassionall dares to question liberal orthodoxy, why does Brad DeLong make up fake statistics? Is he afraid the truth won't support his orthodoxy? He claims twice -- not once, but twice! -- that it is unfair to say the New Deal was ineffective, because "unemployment did fall from 23% in 1932 to 11% in 1939." Yet the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that unemployment as 17% in 1939. Thanks to reader Stephen Hales for drawing DeLong' lies to my attention.

Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 8:33 AM | link  


Sunday, April 12, 2009

WE'VE SEEN SOME STRANGE TIMES CORRECTIONS BEFORE...   ...but this example of the "newspaper of record" eating crow, a tardy correction to a December 2008 story, really takes the cake. Thanks to our correspondent "Irrational Exuberance."
An article in the Year in Ideas issue on Dec. 14, 2008, reported on Josh Klein, whose master’s thesis for New York University’s Interactive Telecommunications Program proposed “a vending machine for crows” that would enable the birds to exchange coins for peanuts. The article reported that beginning in June 2008, Klein tested the machine at the Binghamton Zoo, that the crows learned how to use it and that after a month the crows were actually scouring the ground for loose change.

The Times has since learned that Klein was never at the Binghamton Zoo, and there were no crows on display there in June 2008. He performed these experiments with captive crows in a Brooklyn apartment; he told the reporter about the Brooklyn crows but implied that his work with them was preliminary to the work at the zoo. Asked to explain these discrepancies, Klein now says he and the reporter had a misunderstanding about the zoo.

The reporter never called the zoo in Binghamton to confirm. And while the fact-checker did discuss the details with Klein, he did not call the zoo, as required under The Times’s fact-checking standards. In addition, the article said that Klein was working with graduate students at Cornell University and Binghamton University to study how wild crows make use of his machine, which does exist. Klein did get a professor at Binghamton to help him try it out twice in Ithaca, with assistance from a Binghamton graduate student, and it was not a success. Corvid experts who have since been interviewed have said that Klein’s machine is unlikely to work as intended.

These discrepancies were pointed out to The Times by the Binghamton professor several weeks after the article was published; this editors’ note was delayed for additional reporting. These details should have been discovered during the reporting and editing process. Had that happened, the article would not have been published.


Posted by Donald L. Luskin at 3:32 PM | link