Ep. 17 The Dramatic Consequences of American Elections, and Yes, We’re Being Sarcastic

9 January 2016     |     Tom Woods     |     23

Krugman reassures progressives that Barack Obama really has had some accomplishments. Think of how radically different America would be under Mitt Romney! Top marginal tax rates might differ by a few percentage points, and Obamacare might have been slightly modified! Oy vey.

Krugman Column

Elections Have Consequences” (January 4, 2016)

Contra Column

The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks,” by Christina D. Romer and David H. Romer

Obama Jobs Data

Obama Private Job Record

Resource Mentioned

The Primal Prescription: Surviving the “Sick Care” Sinkhole, by Bob Murphy and Doug McGuff

Special Offers

Get three free issues of the Lara-Murphy Report, Bob Murphy’s financial publication! Click here.

Earn 50% commissions through the Liberty Classroom affiliate program! Details here.

Need More Episodes?

Check out the Tom Woods Show, which releases a new episode every weekday. Become a smarter libertarian in just 30 minutes a day!

Share this post:Digg thisShare on FacebookGoogle+Share on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on Twitter
  • JimD

    You all might be more effective if you were not so tendentious.

    E.g., Obamacre. Krugman makes one central point: the number of uninsured has declined by 17 million. Points to address might be: Is that number correct? Is that a good thing? If not, why not? Is Obamacare responsible? How efficient is it in achieveing the reduction? What would be a better way of cutting the uninsured (assuming that is good goal), etc. But you all never take that on.

    One other observation. Your thesis seems to be that it really does not matter much for Obamacare whether it’s Dems or Reps in power. Might be the case. But it would have be useful to back that assertion with an analysis of the repeal bill the Congress sent Obama this week. Presumably in 2017 a Republican Congress would expect a Republican President to sign the bill. What did the repeal do? Would it have changed things significantly?

    • http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

      As we note in the episode, the subject of Obamacare has come up repeatedly on the show, and we have devoted entire episodes to it. http://www.contrakrugman.com/7

      • JimD

        Funny. I raised the same sort of question on at least one other episode. Better might be to address the question(s.

        • http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

          Even better might be to realize that we do the show for free, rather than making demands. Ah, the Internet.

          • JimD

            Was not making any demands, just raising what I thought was a legitimate question/comment. I take the point that the show is free.

          • Tyler Wombat

            These guys have analyzed “Obamacare” backwards and forwards. Go through the list of Tom Woods Show podcasts. He has had several well-informed guests to help him cover every angle.

          • Lucien

            You should talk about Say’s Law and Keynesian Economics and how William H. Hutt showed that John Maynard Keynes had no idea what Say’s Law was and that Say’s Law actually deals with Price Rigidity. It has nothing to do with profit or equilibrium and DOESN’T MEAN that ‘supply creates it’s own demand’. That is ridiculous Keynesian nonsense.

          • Budthestud

            I’ll take care of this turd, Tom. Let your supporters beat of the haters. Quit wasting your effort.

    • Tyler Wombat

      The Republicans will repeal Obamacare when a glacier crashes through your kitchen window. Please keep us posted on this.

    • Budthestud

      > tendentious.

      Had to look that up, means partisan. I would say that a partisan person is one who justifies their position with nothing but lofty rhetoric. Now why don’t you tell me how they are partisan when they put forward an argument for everything they say. It would seem to me that they are partisan to truth!

      > muh 17 million

      I think they actually addressed thi in their first obamacare video.

      > repeal obamacare

      A lot of what the people in govenrment do is theatre in order to socially posture themselves. I am pretty sure that if they knew they could actually repeal it they would have conveniently had to “compromise”. btw they count these votes beforehand and everyone else knows what everyone elses positions are (like player poker with open hands) so they know if it will pass.

  • Eric

    I’m just wondering where to find info on the cruise. I thought it was 13-16 October and leaves from Galveston, TX but that’s all I know. I’d love to go but need to know how much I must save and where to register. Thank you

    • http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

      We’ll have all the info very soon. Departure date is October 9.

  • Lucien

    Every week Krugman proves the same thing that his psycho-therapy at Princeton is making him more and more delusional.

  • ContraCruiser2016

    Oh my god I HAVE to get on this ship. The flight from Germany to the US alone will be expensive but if I can afford it at all I’ll be there

  • r.a.g.

    It’s par for the course for a partisan hack like K. to claim nonsense like this. I much prefer the George Carlin advice (paraphrasing): “Listen people, your time on election day will be much better spent by staying home and masturbating … At least you will get something out of it”

    What a load of crap from Krugman!!

  • r.a.g.

    Sadly for the contrakrugman podcast, this guy is just a partisan hack nowadays, that’s all he ever writes about, and Lew Rockwell was right to say that he is definitely angling for a position in a future Mrs. Clinton government (“being a good little boy”).

    The rest of his columns are just unsubstantiated assertions about obamacare, jobs under Obama, effects of austerity, and so on, which can be easily proven wrong by just looking at the numbers.

  • SMiller

    Thanks for inviting us! Have you guys thought about inviting liberals to the Contra Cruise? I can’t say I’d ride with Krugmen on board, God forbid but with some open-minded liberals, we could really have a fun time getting contra and staying true to the name 🙂

    • http://www.TomWoods.com Tom Woods

      Um, the cruise is for relaxation…. 🙂

      • https://www.facebook.com/david.rogers.hunt David_Rogers_Hunt

        Don’t you find contact sports relaxing?

        I have always found that it is quite possible to discuss matters with left liberal progressives once one accepts the premise that we find each other’s world views to be mutually irreconcilable. The left believes wealth arrives by redistribution while we believe you have to bake your cake before you can eat it. Once that is resolved,… all sorts of productive conversations can take place.

        I intend to sign up for the Contra Cruise as soon as you post some information on same!

  • Kristian

    Silence of the Lambs? HAHAHA really Tom? That about killed me!

  • Jimmy S.

    Tom, if you were in “international waters” you’d have to deal with FATCA!

  • Damien Spillane

    Normally love a lot of what you guys have to say but this was a show of the usual holier than thou puritanical libertarianism, the kind that has inspired many to stay home during the elections and ensure the even bigger government guy gets in. E.g. you do not directly address whether Romney would have brought about tax increases as Obama did because you know full well he wouldn’t have. Nor do you address whether he would have instituted an Obamacare equivalent. This would have been exceedingly unlikely.

    You also don’t mention that Republican efforts during the 90’s cut welfare rolls in half and that it was mostly the Democrats fault that spending blew out during the 80’s. Also omitted is the fact that Republican candidates like Ted Cruz are of a far higher quality than George Bush jnr. (even favours a gold standard) and failed Republican candidates like Dole and McCain.

    But of course Cruz falls down on one issue, foreign affairs, (even though most libertarians would be honest enough to admit he’d be no worse than Clinton) so the puritans can’t endorse him!

    • Budthestud

      They’ve explicitly said before that the have many problems with republicans and they point out these problems on their show all the time.

      Krugman just so happens to be a lefty so that’s what they mostly criticize.

      Also, must one ALWAYS point out their grievances with the opposing political party when one criticizes a party or even just someone in that party? I think the answer would be no, but feel free to explain why I am wrong.