All of which only proves her point, no?

I just love how she uses the self-impressed ‘historically’ to describe her ledger of dipshit opinions.

Ironically, it may be possible to trace back this flood of money to the IMF–and Timothy Geithner.

Funny how Jane Galt could identify Timmy, but even after mentioning credit default swaps, Phil Gramm escapes without notice.

more problematic than I have historically been willing to credit

You have to admit, though, that her wonderful prose makes up for her dumbass ideas.

Great call, Atlantic.

FAIL blogger is full of FAIL.

More to the point, reality has been waaaay diferent than she has historically been willing to admit.

Reality, meet Megan.
Megan, meet Reality. Megan? Megan!? Are you there, Megan????

This article has nothing to do with context-free grammars.

This article has nothing to do with context-free grammars.

If it did all the other articles would have to wait until it had finished digging the pennies out of the goddamned change purse.

To me, this doesn’t suggest Geithner or the IMF were incompetence

Go Megan!

I just love how she uses the self-impressed ‘historically’ to describe her ledger of dipshit opinions.

Ahhhh – this is why I come here. The phrase-turning is so, so choice.

Ironically, it may be possible to trace back this flood of money to the IMF–and Timothy Geithner.

Who knew McArdle was a subscriber to the Morissette school of irony?

Ironically, it may be possible to trace my bad html tagging to The Atlantic–and Megan McArdle.

Who knew McArdle was a subscriber to the Morissette school of irony?

Them’s fightin’ words! You’re talking about the woman I love! (Alanis, not McAddled).
True story: Alanis and I had a torrid love affair some years back – her loss that she didn’t actually participate in said affair (I choose to believe).

Again, us on the crazy left were pointing this shit out the entire time and get responded to by the ‘How Dare You Question Amurka!’ caveman right, the insane from first axiom propertarians AND the sneering, Big Cash-worshiping pseudo liberaloids like, yes, Larry Summers and Bill Clinton.

By the way, about that Asian financial crisis — do any of the McArdle-ish snotbags recall the amount of scorn heaped on then Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed, who said, in effect, ‘F*@% all your damn crazy IMF bullsh*t, we’re going to intervene to protect our economy?’

At the time all the regular shitbags were screeching at how stupid Malaysia was gonna hurt isself real bad by not listening to the deregulationary ‘austerity treatment’ wackos, including but way way way not limited to little Timmy Geithner and Big Poppa Larry Summers.

If not, here’s a historical prompt all you arrogant market-cheering morons:

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: The Ostrich That Roared; Did Malaysia, Its Head in the Sand, Duck the Asian Crisis?

By MARK LANDLER | Published: Saturday, September 4, 1999 | The New York God Damn Times

[Repeat: That’s 19-f***ing-99.]

If you had not visited this city of dreamy minarets and dazzling skyscrapers before last week, you might wonder whether the Asian crisis ever happened.

On Tuesday, Malaysia’s leaders dedicated the Petronas Twin Towers, a futuristic colossus that is the world’s tallest building. As fireworks blazed and laser beams pierced the night skies, the Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamad, declared, ”We need something to express our towering ambition.”

Malaysia did suffer a humbling economic collapse, of course, as the half-empty towers attest. But with the country now showing signs of a robust recovery, Dr. Mahathir is exuding victory and vindication.

Unlike its neighbors, Malaysia chose to fend off the Asian typhoon by boarding up its windows. Drawing the wrath of the free-market West, it imposed sweeping controls on its capital markets — suspending offshore trading in its currency and locking foreign capital in the country for a year.

Dr. Mahathir says the moves protected Malaysia from the predations of foreign currency traders. Without controls, he says, the traders would have caused wild swings in the currency, which could have decimated the economy and ignited social unrest in this multiracial society. Business people here initially balked, but most now rally around the Prime Minister.

”We did not implode as a society; there were no mass riots on the streets, as in Indonesia,” said Francis Yeoh, an ethnic Chinese tycoon who is one of Malaysia’s richest men. ”It is not half-vindication, it is full vindication.”

On Wednesday, Malaysia relaxed its rules on the repatriation of capital. Now, as foreign investors weigh whether to pour money back into Malaysia, Dr. Mahathir’s policy is getting another hearing. Economists, fund managers, business people and even officials at the International Monetary Fund acknowledge that Dr. Mahathir appears to have won his risky gamble.

To be sure, most economists and policy makers still view capital controls with deep skepticism. They say that shutting off markets and freezing currencies can strangle investment and cause damaging distortions.

Hubert Neiss, director of Asia-Pacific operations at the I.M.F., said at a seminar in Tokyo this week that Malaysia’s recovery had little to do with the controls. But he also said Malaysia should not be condemned for the move.

Other economists say Dr. Mahathir has proved that controls can be useful in dire situations.

”There was always a case for capital controls in principle during a crisis,” said Paul Krugman, a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who wrote an influential article defending controls in Fortune magazine on the eve of Malaysia’s announcement.

”The argument was that they were impractical — that they would inevitably screw up the real economy,” he said. ”What Malaysia has shown is that they are actually more workable than everyone claimed.”

Certainly, Malaysia’s performance has confounded skeptics, who predicted the controls would deplete reserves and stop the economy in its tracks. After contracting 6.7 percent last year, Malaysia’s gross domestic product rose 4.1 percent in the second quarter. The country’s reserves, far from diminishing, have shot up 60 percent, to $32 billion, since August 1998.

Malaysia is such a clear fucking counterexample and yet none of these dorkoids over the past months of their retrospective barking about 1997 said one god-damn scrawny word about it, as far as I’ve seen.

Go to god-damned hell and die, all you ‘free market’ shitbags. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not just exaggerating for effect. I really, really despise the moron cheerleaders like the McArdles and the Samuelsons and the Friedmans, the whole stinking, miserable lot.

At least the coffee’s good this morning.

El Cid hates Baby Gordon Gecko Jesus.

Oh, OK. Then perhaps y’all’ll be good enough to offer us some lube before the next bout of gang ass-rape.

El Cid hates Baby Gordon Gecko Jesus.

Who doesn’t? Seeing Baby Jesus climbing upside-down via his setae-covered toe pads freaks everyone the hell out.

Seeing Baby Jesus climbing upside-down via his setae-covered toe pads freaks everyone the hell out.

You can’t get him off the ceiling to make the wine.

“…historically…”

Now there’s presumption for you.

Hey, stop dissin’ the lady. She’s got a Wharton MBA, and is the tallest female “econoblogger” evah!

Kids today. No respect.

the Petronas Twin Towers — one in the shape of a gigantic silvery stag, the other oddly like a Jack Russell terrier, a futuristic colossus that is the world’s tallest building.

Fixed

What it does suggest is that global capital flows may be way more problematic than I have hysterically been willing to credit.
====================

Feex.

Wow. I’m impressed.

All you guys have had deep, thoughtful opinions about “global capital flows” for all this time and I’ve just heard the term for the first time last week.

I still don’t know enough to even HAVE an opinion on “global capital flows” and all you guys know in an absolute sense who’s right and who’s wrong on the whole “global capital flows” question. I’m not sure I even understand what the question IS.

You’re way, WAY ahead of me on this….

mikey

No Coke, Pepsi!

Headline from La McArdle:

The LA Times copy desk is officially too small

Well, actually, no it’s not. It’s just that Jonah’s ass is too large.

She’s still peddling the crap story that Greenspan was innocent, and it was the Asian savings glut that killed the market. But she’s also too chickenshit to say it directly.

Chomsky will be right again:
He’s still wrong about universal human grammar.

Seeing Baby Jesus climbing upside-down via his setae-covered toe pads freaks everyone the hell out.
The way he catches souls with his long sticky tongue is pretty creepy too.

It only suggests to Mcardle. Doesn’t light up in giant “FAIL” neon sign bigger than Greenland that maybe the last decade of unregulated greed capitalism, may have a downside i.e. a soup kitchen economy?

He’s still wrong about universal human grammar.

From what I’ve read Chomsky no longer proposes it either, and seems to flatly say those earlier ideas were wrong. That’s because he’s decent and honest, and not a monomanic addicted to pet theories forever.

Tone it down a little, Megan.

Chomsky no longer proposes it either, and seems to flatly say those earlier ideas were wrong.
Now if only he could persuade Pinker to shut up for a while…

Pinker’s a brilliant guy, but an odd duck.

He may well be brilliant, but thanks to S,N! I already receive enough exposure to the combination of smug certainty and wrongness, so I need not read any more of his books.

Seeing Baby Jesus climbing upside-down via his setae-covered toe pads freaks everyone the hell out.

You save big on nails with him, though.

Chomsky was prematurely anti-speculative capital flows.

Go to god-damned hell and die, all you ‘free market’ shitbags. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not just exaggerating for effect. I really, really despise the moron cheerleaders like the McArdles and the Samuelsons and the Friedmans, the whole stinking, miserable lot.

This kind of free market selective ignoring of evidence is much older than 1999:

When prisoner’s dilemma was tested among RAND secretaries, none of them employed the “rational” strategy of betraying their opponent. Instead, they trusted each other. Yet many prominent economists, including Fredrick Von Hayek and Milton Freedman, believed that the only way for a society to live freely was to go back to the old age of free-markets, and let self-interest create an autonomous balance among the people. Politicians such as Margaret Thatcher, Boris Yeltsin, Tony Blair, and George W. Bush all sought to implement such ideas to create a balanced society, but sadly, they all failed.

and

“I realise what I said at some times may have over-emphasised rationality,” an elderly John Nash tells Curtis in an extraordinary interview, after emerging from years of battling schizophrenia. “Human beings are much more complicated than the human being as a businessman.” In fact, the documentary notes sardonically, experiments show that only two kinds of people behave like perfect little economists in every arena of life: economists themselves, and psychopaths.

It is a stunning revelation to me that “behavioural economics” is only recently gaining any credence. The experiments based on the assumption of perfect self-interest were failures in the 1950s and still we have people proudly calling themselves “libertarians” as if that is any better than being an alchemist or a phrenologist.

To be honest, I trust alchemists and phrenologists more. Neither of them declared selfishness to be a virtue.

She’ll forget all about it once the iPhone 3.0 update drops. Expect essay-length posts on the wonders of cut and paste.