As I said previously Sinclair Davidson at Catalaxxy had to climb down after the original author of the criticism agreed he had made a mistake.

This happened ages ago.

BTW, Harry, did you hold the view in 2002 that Greenspan should engineer a double-dip recession for the US then and there rather than risk a future boom and bust? At least Krugman actually saw that the alternative to recession was indeed a housing bubble.

He just didn’t foresee that the combination of globalised finance and flawed financial engineering would turn a regulation housing bust (leading in the normal course of events to a localised and probably weak US recession) into a potential global depression. That’s the real lesson, IMO, from all this – that local asset bubbles can have global effects, and that therefore financial regulation is a global, not local, issue. That’s something Keynes – an even smarter man than Krugman – did understand.

Of course the comments by Krugman are relevant to the ongoing arguments he is making for for an even stronger US expansion.

I don’t see the irony despite the humouress tone in places. He was concerned about a ‘double dip’ recession and wanted a big expansion.

A well known economist’s attempt at forecasting events turned out to be wrong. Got any more news?

He was being ironic.

The original person who wrote this his realised his error. This was done and buried some time ago as anyone who read Mr Krugman’s blog would have known

I am sensitive to issues of misrepresentation so I will cite the relevant paragraphs:

“The basic point is that the recession of 2001 wasn’t a typical postwar slump, brought on when an inflation-fighting Fed raises interest rates and easily ended by a snapback in housing and consumer spending when the Fed brings rates back down again. This was a prewar-style recession, a morning after brought on by irrational exuberance. To fight this recession the Fed needs more than a snapback; it needs soaring household spending to offset moribund business investment. And to do that, as Paul McCulley of Pimco put it, Alan Greenspan needs to create a housing bubble to replace the Nasdaq bubble.

Judging by Mr. Greenspan’s remarkably cheerful recent testimony, he still thinks he can pull that off. But the Fed chairman’s crystal ball has been cloudy lately; remember how he urged Congress to cut taxes to head off the risk of excessive budget surpluses? And a sober look at recent data is not encouraging”.

Where have I misrepresented Paul Krugman?

This was written about by Sinclair Davidson at Catallaxy with the same ignorance and had to be commented with mud on face with which you will have to do when you get to the context.

This is so old I am surprised you haven’t heard the whole tale