35 Comments

1. Dave Schuler:

Theoreticians frequently look down on those who do field work.

Jul 10, 2004 - 7:36 am 2. Sam_S:

Ha. Looks like the kid can look after herself quite well.

Krugman will probably be rethinking his reference approach. He can make all the wrong, slanted, snarky, and stupid economic projections he wants, and the embarassing errors don’t show up for a few months, after he’s changed the subjects enough times that the audience forgets the details.

Telling dumb untruths about living people though, is a great way to get teeth marks on his butt. I think I’ll link that one, too: it’s priceless.

Sam

Jul 10, 2004 - 7:41 am 3. Cap'n Billy:

Re: Simon on Simone (Sorry, couldn’t resist!):

When I read things like this I’m almost optimistic about her generation. I suppose we’ll find out if this optimism is justified in a few months. Anyway, congratulations on your new system, Roger. It seems to work well, and I’m even noticing something approaching civility from a couple of the usual suspects. I suppose someone will wake me up soon.

Jul 10, 2004 - 8:08 am 4. Syl:

I learned a lot from her article, mainly that there’s even more I don’t know than I think I don’t know. She explained the problems without being in your face about it, and leaves the reader with the sense that ‘There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy’ concerning what is actually happening in Iraq.

The devil is always in the details, and it’s the refusal to even look at details that makes careless accusations of incompetence and lack of planning so juvenile.

What reporter has asked himself the simple question: How are Iraqi’s paid for their work? If he has, he answers himself by rueing the reconstruction costs that could have been spent ‘elsewhere’ rather than looking at the creation of the actual process, what hurdles it must overcome, and its success.

Excellent article, Simone.

Jul 10, 2004 - 8:44 am 5. DennisThePeasant:

Ah, Paul Krugman…

You really have to know his particulars to properly despise the man.

He spent much of the late 1980s and early 1990s disparaging Lester Thurow (not necessarily a bad thing) for being more journalist than economist. Given hindsight in the matter, it would appear the good Professor has immersed himself in the journalistic credo (both in terms of accuracy and professional ethics) to an extent that Thurow never imagined.

He expended a significant stockpile of bile accusing George W. Bush and the Republican Party of enabling the massive Enron fraud in exchange for corporate contributions, even to the rather infamous extent of opining that the Enron fraud would have a greater impact on the world than the 9/11 attacks. But then when it is disclosed that the good Professor accepted a lucrative consulting contract from Enron…well, that was different.

And of course he cannot be bothered with the reconstruction of Iraq’s economy. There is no money in it. The good Professor would rather accept large consulting fees from viciously anti-semitic, anti-democratic asian governments…and then defend those governments in print. Yes, the good Professor is greatly worried about truth and justice twice a week and in print…but that doesn’t pay for the Jag. Neither would working for the CPA.

There was a time, and it seems forever ago, when Paul Krugman was considered a likely candidate to be the next Keynes. There was that much respect for his talents. While his career has certainly been distinquished, it is obvious to those who have watched him that Krugman has never truly fulfilled the promise he once exhibited in his chosen career. And now his descent into media whoredom is so complete that Krugman’s reputation as a serious economist is in jeopardy, and sadly, Krugman seems unable to see this through the haze of approval he is getting from those who use him for their own ends.

My own take on him is that he is a farty little man in the midst of a farty little mid-life crisis. Anyone who has seen him speak (I seen him more than once on CSPAN) would be able to pick up on this vibe pretty easily. This is man who imagines himself greatly feared by the Administration and the Republican Party, and has said more than once that he can imagine the vast right wing conspiracy trying to hound him out of the country. And with that, you just have to come to the conclusion that Krugman is not much more than an Ivy League version of our own lil joe…desperate for attention and even more desperate for importance.

It is good that Simone Ledeen has publicly rebutted Paul Krugman, but I would urge her not to dwell on either the man or his actions. Paul Krugman’s professional life has been a case study in double standards. He must be taken seriously only, and I do mean only, to the extent that he must be rebutted. Other than that, there is no reason to get caught up in his mid-life convulsions or his dishonesty.

Jul 10, 2004 - 9:03 am 6. Navy Mom:

Congratulations, Simone, you are a positive force in this world. Never allow the naysayers to impede your courage, initiative, or progress. You are the future of our country.

Jul 10, 2004 - 9:25 am 7. richard mcenroe:

Well, having gotten my weekly dose of “Fuck you, Jew” at the counterprotest last nite (the Bishop would be stunned), I don’t expect Krugman or his readers to read Simone’s article, pay attention to it, or even respond. The left is beyond thought now and sees no reason to change.

Jul 10, 2004 - 9:35 am 8. Mike_Nargizian:

One of the advantages of the Internet and alternative news sources is that it puts great checks on these writers who would formerly have the run to say whatever they wanted unchecked.

1) The LA Times getting slammed for its outright propaganda and lie about Bremer leaving Iraq without saying anything or “looking an Iraqi in the eye”… (Who made that one up at the Soviet Times?)

2) Krugman’s many misquotations, misrepresentations, half truths, editorializing of facts and figures… etc..

There are always places to go now where you can double check people like Krugman’s economic ‘facts and figures’ and fairyland editorialized stories which of course have nothging to do with his “background in Economics” but never stops him from trying to wrap into his so-called “economics” articles.

Jul 10, 2004 - 9:38 am 9. Mike_Nargizian:

Such as the Econopundit site -

… until he knows everything about nothing

http://www.econopundit.com/archive/2004_07_01_econopundit_archive.html#108938715016003614

Professor Krugman, isolated academic that he is, ignores the law of unanticipated consequences owing to his lack of sophisticated knowledge of real-world employers and employees:

John Kerry has proposed an ambitious health care plan that would extend coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans, while reducing premiums for the insured. To pay for that plan, Mr. Kerry wants to rescind recent tax cuts for the roughly 3 percent of the population with incomes above $200,000…

First, the Kerry plan raises the maximum incomes under which both children and parents are eligible to receive benefits from Medicaid and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. This would extend coverage to many working-class families, who often fall into a painful gap: they earn too much money to qualify for government help, but not enough to pay for health insurance. As a result, the Kerry plan would probably end a national scandal, the large number of uninsured American children.

Second, the Kerry plan would provide “reinsurance” for private health plans, picking up 75 percent of the medical bills exceeding $50,000 a year. Although catastrophic medical expenses strike only a tiny fraction of Americans each year, they account for a sizeable fraction of health care costs…

The Kerry campaign contends that it can pay for its health care plan by rolling back only the cuts for taxpayers with incomes above $200,000. The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, which has become the best source for tax analysis now that the Treasury Department’s Office of Tax Policy has become a propaganda agency, more or less agrees: it estimates the revenue gain from the Kerry tax plan at $631 billion over the next decade.

Here are a few interesting facts gleaned from the Tax Policy Center Professor Krugman refers us to.

(1) The tiny 3% of the population Krugman says will finance the Kerry plan (thru higher taxes) already provides about 33% of all federal revenue.

(2) As I read the footnotes explaining the Tax Policy Center’s method of calculating “pretax household cash income,” the Kerry/Krugman $200,000 income threshold captures the gross income of virtually every small business in the US — all the way from high tech startups to the grubby two-employee owner-run hot dog stands where they grab their lunch.

Now consider this. There are currently hundreds of thousands of struggling small businesses whose health insurance bill constitutes the simple difference between profit and loss. Doesn’t Krugman worry they will dump their plans in anticipation of newly-minted government programs designed just for workers like theirs?

The law of unanticipated consequences suggests the very announcement of the Kerry/Krugman plan — indeed, the very appearance of today’s NYT Krugman editorial — may result in fewer low income families with health insurance.

Link posted by Steve Antler : 10:13 AM

Jul 10, 2004 - 10:10 am 10. G.A. Cerny:

Leaving Ms. Ledeen out of it, how well did the CPA do?

According to a poll taken by the CPA itself near the end of its run, confidence in the CPA was just over 10%, while 92% of the Iraqi population thought of foreign troops as occupiers. Clearly, something went very wrong with the occupation. The GAO report on Iraq,

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04902r.pdf

gives any number of examples.

See also this story from the WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26310-2004Jul3.html

Jul 10, 2004 - 10:29 am 11. Charlie (Colorado):

Yeah, GA, let’s ask how the CPA did.

Rather than copy the whole thing in, let me suggest you start by reading Chrenkoff’s Good News from Iraq series. But note, in passing, that Iraq’s power system is generating more power than ever before, their schools are running, their economy is booming, unemployment has dropped by 66 percent in a matter of months, and the CPA turned power over to a popular (in both senses of the word) government on time and apparently under budget.

After a military campaign comparable to Cannae and Zama in its brilliance, and with rather fewer civilian deaths than the usual UN peacekeeping expedition.

“The shame is not in being an idiot — the shame is in remaining an idiot.”

Jul 10, 2004 - 10:51 am 12. Charlie (Colorado):

Actually, come to think of it — both Simone and Michael wrote the Times to complain of the misquotations. Anyone seen any corrections?

Jul 10, 2004 - 10:53 am 13. G.A. Cerny:

Charlie,

I’m not sure if I understand; the CPA’s pronounced unpopularity in Iraq was because not enough Iraqis check out optimistic blogs that would explain to them how well things are going?

But, you should know that pre-war electricity production fluctuated between 3,400 and 4,400 megawatts. From the GAO report, which I cited earlier:

“Iraq’s daily peak generation capacity increased from about 3,400 megawatts

on September 25, 2003, to about 4,200 megawatts on June 1, 2004.”

More than ever before? Not quite, that’s barely meeting the pre-war level. Worse:

“The CPA set a goal of 6,000 megawatts of generating capacity by June 30,

2004.”

Jul 10, 2004 - 11:20 am 14. mrp:

When it comes to government-funded projects, it is important to keep things in perspective.

Take, for instance,this USASOC May 21, 2004 news release.

The author, Sgt. Tina Beller, does an excellent job of laying out the difficulties of providing adequate electrical power in a destitute country engulfed in an insurgent war. Not only was there an existing deficit of power, but with the Coalition occupation, imports of electrical appliances soared. From the article:

Demand for electricity, a product of healthy national economic growth, continues to rise even as coalition and Iraqi engineers build new capacity. According to Parker, up to four times the current electricity allocation will be dedicated to major Iraqi businesses over the next year. This will enable IraqÔøΩs key industries ÔøΩ such as cement, fertilizer, phosphate, and petrochemical ÔøΩ to add new working shifts and bolster production in response to increased internal demand for these goods.

National electricity demand further rises as citizens purchase record numbers of air conditioners, refrigerators, televisions, and other power consuming household goods, Parker said.

Now, if one is looking for a stupendously late, outrageously bloated US government white elephant on steroids, there’s no need to look Iraqi-ward; just take a look at this Democrat-inspired, liberally financed money pit.

Jul 10, 2004 - 12:15 pm 15. Charlie (Colorado):

G.A.: I’m not sure if I understand;….

Well, G.A. practice makes perfect.

With respect to power, I see different figures all the time; you don’t like the ones I quoted. As Arthur says, restoring power generation as fast as they have is impressive.

Now, ask yourself why the total power generation capacity for a country that has nearly free energy was so small; don’t babble about the sanctions, since Saddam first of all had twenty-odd years without sanctions, and second since Saddam somehow managed to fund the construction of dozens of the alabaster-and-gold-leaf whorehouses he called “palaces” during the sanctions.

With respect to your original point, clearly you don’t define a free, sovereign, self-governed Iraq as the goal; you instead apparently think that making the CPA extremely popular was the goal.

You are, therein, mistaken.

Jul 10, 2004 - 12:17 pm 16. Knucklehead:

Richard McEnroe,

“The left is beyond thought now and sees no reason to change.”

The left’s idea of being “level headed” is to foam out of both side’s of it’s mouth. What a loathesome “movement” they’ve become.

Jul 10, 2004 - 12:26 pm 17. G.A. Cerny:

Charlie,

You misunderstand my point. Even the most well-run occupation authority might never have been very popular, but having the approval of 11% of the population means that the Iraqi people, who probably know a little bit more about situations there than you or I, consider the CPA to have made a mess of it.

What, only the opinions of English-language Iraqi bloggers matter?

Since you have so much to say about “goals”– stability and safety not being among those you list– I repeat, the CPA failed to meet its own goal for electrical production. It got, in fact, only two-thirds of the way there. That’s not

a number pulled from thin air, or some guy named Arthur with a blog, that’s from the GAO, which had access to the CPA’s own data.

I like the argument that the reason that they failed to meet their goal is because of all the electrical goods that Iraqis are buying up. Too bad they can’t use them, in some places, when the power shuts off at night.

Jul 10, 2004 - 1:20 pm 18. G.A. Cerny:

And, while we’re on power outages, this article just went on the wires:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040710/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_baking_in_baghdad&cid=540&ncid=1480

The power is down an average of 12 hours a day.

Please don’t tell me that this means the power is half-full.

Jul 10, 2004 - 1:35 pm 19. TedM:

What the article seems to say is that in Baghdad the power is on about 12 hours a day. What is does not say is if this is throughout the city at the same time or if there is a rolling blackout in different sections.

And if this is not satisfactory(whichitisnt) I hope Bechtel or Brown and Root or RM Parsons or MW KEllogg is working on redesign, maintenance or designing additional plants.

Jul 10, 2004 - 1:48 pm 20. chuck:

GA,

Twelve hours a day is actually an improvement. One of the reasons for the low hours is that now the electricity is spread more evenly over the country instead being concentrated in Baghdad. The number of electric appliances has also gone up.

Frankly, I can’t understand your apparent love of former times when a bloody tyrant ruled the area. Aren’t you happy to see him gone? Most Iraqis are, by the polls. And what are you doing to make things better, besides bitchin’. Are you donating anywhere, sending books, shoes, toys, etc. ?

Jul 10, 2004 - 2:07 pm 21. G.A. Cerny:

Chuck,

Ah, yes. If you think we bungled the occupation, it must be because of an “apparent love of former times when a bloody tyrant ruled the area.”

Y’all really have run out of arguments. At any rate, I didn’t bring up electrical output, “Charlie” did. I just pointed out that electrical output wasn’t the best example of the success of the CPA.

Jul 10, 2004 - 2:14 pm 22. Pierre Legrand:

Paul Krugman isn’t about doing anything but hurting Bush to insure a Democratic Victory. Had we gone into Iraq, killed no one, thrown out Saddam, established a Democracy, insured the rights of the individual, found tons and tons of Weapons of Mass Destruction, video tapes of Bin Laden and Saddam sharing a beer while watching the planes fly into the towers complimenting each other on a plan well carried out, if all of that were true, Paul Krugman and the rest would still be complaining about how it was all a total failure and that the evidence doesn’t mean anything and Gore would be saying we planted the WMD’s there.

My mother who has been a Democrat since she watched the WPA trucks deliver food to her and her family, thinks the party is unhinged. The problem for the Democrats is that the far left has captured control of the party and they cannot campaign on their philosophy since they are at least smart enough to know that would be rejected out of hand. All they have left is hatred. We desperately need a rational opposition party to win this war.

A rational Democratic party would be offering rational suggestions on how to win the war quicker. Not by surrendering or imagining that this is all a product of Karl Rove’s attempt to re-elect Bush. Sadly we don’t have that…we don’t have anyone to keep the Republicans honest. The choice we have is surrender or fight the war with one hand tied behind our backs.

Pierre

Jul 10, 2004 - 2:32 pm 23. Syl:

George

If I were an Iraqi who never met an American (and only 4% of the population had contact) and I didn’t _know_ what the CPA was doing. If I looked around me and though Saddam was gone I didn’t notice too many changes and I figure the CPA just represented occupying power…I’d be against it too.

The polls are not an indication of what the CPA was accomplishing because many of the accomplishments are, well, kinda hidden to most people’s eyes. Electricity is something tangible they can hang on. Getting the oil pumping is not. Setting up an independent judiciary is not. Developing a working civil bureaucracy is not. Refurbishing schools is, but not everyone saw that and they only saw their own. Even the areas that learned about democracy and held local elections may not have connected that specifically with the CPA. Getting the picture?

I’m just saying because the polls find disatisfaction concerning the CPA does not therefore mean failure.

Jul 10, 2004 - 2:46 pm 24. G.A. Cerny:

Syl,

If the CPA poll had been the other way– 89% approval– you would have dismissed anyone who made that argument as a partisan hack.

Quite right, too.

I remember back in the day when one post from an Iraqi blogger would have everyone who comments here posting amens. Now, the Iraqi people just don’t know what’s going on in their own country, and their opinions can’t be credited.

There’s something that you leave out: support for the CPA declined as time went on and their successes had more time to be witnessed by the Iraqi population. It would seem that, however intangible or invisible those successes are, they would be more discernible to Iraqis as time went on, not less.

And, Syl, do you have a source for that 4% figure?

Jul 10, 2004 - 2:58 pm 25. TedM:

George,

All this back and forth gets us nowhere.

You are a pretty well read guy. think about this:

A year from now, what 3 or 4 events or circumstances would lead you to say that the effort in Iraq was worthwhile. And 3 or 4 that would lead you to say that it was not.

Jul 10, 2004 - 3:08 pm 26. Syl:

The source was a recent poll where that was a question asked. Don’t have the link handy. It could possibly even be the poll you’re referring to?

One of the reasons we get excited by some of the Iraqi bloggers is that it proves not everybody is against us the way the MSM portrays Iraq. I don’t think anyone here at all presumes they speak for all Iraqis. And why wouldn’t we wish to point them out when the Washington Post is famous for finding only those Iraqi’s who are against us. Reuters too. Hey, Omar’s opinions count as well!

I would also posit that the security situation has a lot to do with attitudes. Bremer told the Iraqis he was sorry that it wasn’t under control.

Jul 10, 2004 - 3:11 pm 27. G.A. Cerny:

TedM,

Please, one subject at a time. We were discussing the CPA.

But if you insist, may I suggest that you begin by saying what it would take for you to say– today, or a year, or ten years from now– that the war had been a mistake.

And, if you recall, we had this discussion on a thread some time ago. Now, I’ll only say that we’re unlikely to know in a year.

Jul 10, 2004 - 3:24 pm 28. Charlie (Colorado):

Nice dancing, GA, but you’re not making a lot of logical progress.

First, you continue the ad populorem of drawing a conclusion that the poll results of a poll about the Iraqi opinion of the CPA tells us anything we want to know. If Paul Bremer was running for President of Iraq, it might be otherwise, but it simply wasn’t our intention or goal to ensure a popular continuing presence in Iraq. You might also find it useful to consider some of the other polls, like the numbers for whether they want the US/Coalition to up and leave, or whether they feel the new interim government is legitimate, or whether they feel things are better than they were.

As far as power generation in itself, I’ve seen people assert, in an authoritative tone, that the amount of power generated is slightly more, about the same, and slightly less than before the war. As was pointed out above, the satisfaction with power seems to be much greater in the hustings than in Bagdad, because the Bagdadis are made to share in the limited power. Maybe you think it is a significant criticism that the previously privileged ethnic minority is now suffering equally (although, if so, there are several other US policies of which I’d be interested your opinion.)

In any case, though, it’s a straw man: the CPA’s primary goal was not to be the best Public Service Company in the Fertile Crescent. The goal was to take a country in which the previous fascist thugocracy had been eliminated, prevent its being taken over by civil war or a new bunch of thugs, and turn it over to a government in which there was a reasonable probability to develop a real popular government.

Complaining that things didn’t go as well as they might have is one thing; claiming that the CPA was a failure suggests either ignorance, or malice.

You don’t seem ignorant.

You might also, with a little exploration, find John Dos Passos’ articles about the occupation of Germany; the Occupation Government wasn’t very popular there either. Unless you believe it’s therefore a valid argument that we shouldn’t have taken on Hitler, your argument here has real troubles.

Second, yes I do tend to depend on English-speaking Iraqi bloggers. It’s not a great situation: I’d love to have more sources. However, following the utter demolition of the reliability of most mainstream sources — eg, the calumny that Paul Bremer “snuck out of Iraq” with “no farewell address” — I sure can’t depend on the more conventional media.

I would love to be able to read Arabic and follow things from those sources, but I find that reading English, Mandarin, Spanish, and German seems to have exhausted my linguistic ambitions.

Third, and finally, if you look carefully at those articles by “some guy named Arthur”, you’ll find that some parts of the text have a different appearance. They’re different colors — sort of a red-orange — and underlined.

These are called “links”.

Experienced web-users find these very convenient.

Jul 10, 2004 - 4:31 pm 29. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

“Theoreticians frequently look down on those who do field work”….it’s even worse than that. We now have a large number of people who consider themselves members of an elite *specifically because* they do no useful work themselves, but rather devote their lives to criticizing the work of others.

Jul 10, 2004 - 7:03 pm 30. richard mcenroe:

photoncourier ó I’d like to criticize that statement… *g*

Jul 10, 2004 - 7:37 pm 31. Rick Ballard:

For anyone wishing to explore the miserable failure of the CPA in reaching the 6,000MW goal by June 30 this site provides the terrible truth. We will not have raised Iraq’s power generation capabilities by 50% until September – probably a full 45 to 60 days behind schedule. What a horrible, terrible tragedy, taking a full fifteen months to raise production capacity by 50%.

Right. Installing 2,000MW in new capacity in fifteen months in peacetime would be a wonder.

TedM,

Mr. Cerny seems congenitally incaple of providing a metric for success. He is quite good at failure though. He’s never seen a half-full glass in his life.

Jul 10, 2004 - 8:57 pm 32. chuck:

Speaking of economists and field work, I recall meeting a German economist at the airport in Quangzhou back in 1987 on my way to Shanghai. I had noticed that many of the chinese were carrying bananas to bring home. So I asked the economist why that was, but, surprise, he hadn’t even noticed that economic activity. As far as I could tell from later experience, the cause was a lack of distribution for produce, so that bananas couldn’t be had in the north of the country. So the bananas were telling us something about the infrastructure. This is field work at it’s most basic: observation of everyday life. I would have thought that any economist would have been fascinated by all the economic activity visible in everyday life, but it seems that some at least are not.

Jul 10, 2004 - 9:40 pm 33. richard mcenroe:

Rick Ballard ó For comparison, California is still facing an energy crunch this summer because we have yet to increase our in-state generator capacity after the last wave of rolling blackouts, and that’s been over a year.

Jul 11, 2004 - 8:11 am 34. photoncourier.blogspot.com:

Since several people have commented on the electricity situation in Iraq, here are a few points. Grid-based electrical systems are highly vulnerable to sabotage and plain theft (people stealing the copper and aluminum wires in order to sell them.) Problems with the power grid will probably continue until the security situation improves substantially.

One mistake the U.S. made was not putting more emphasis on portable generators. While they don’t offer a solution to power for homes, they do offer a way to keep factories and water-pumping stations going. These beasts are readily available, new and used, in sizes up to 3 megawatts or so. Why hasn’t there been a major program to acquire generators, send them to Iraq, and install them in places where they are most needed?

I suspect the psychology was, “well, it’ll take 6 months to buy ‘em and get ‘em over there, and by that time, the grid will be fixed”…and then, 6 months later, “well, I wish we’d done it 6 months ago, but surely the grid will be fixed in *another* 6 months, so no point ordering them now..”

Jul 11, 2004 - 9:36 am 35. Sun-Tzu:

One odd thing about Krugman’s argument:

Joe Wilson claimed that it was inconceivable that he would have been dispatched on his mission to Niger for nepotism reasons (e.g., on his wife’s recommendation) because it didn’t pay all that well and it wasn’t a nice neighborhood, and besides his wife was pregnant.

Odd, innit, that Wilson would claim that he wouldn’t be recommended to visit a country where he knew people, could stay in nice hotels, all on government expense, and a whole lot of folks believed him.

Yet, these are the SAME people who would give credence to Paul Krugman, suggesting that a person going to a war zone, where people are getting their heads hacked off, would be the result of nepotism.

Nepotism must work oddly, in the land of the Left?

Jul 12, 2004 - 7:17 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: