News Ticker

The Sub-Zero Hack Nobel Laureates Who Promoted the 2021 American ‘Rescue’ Plan

PHOTO: Getty/Foreign Policy

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, also called the COVID-19 Stimulus Package or American Rescue Plan, is an $1.9-trillion economic stimulus bill (aka boondoggle) used as the key looting mechanism and distraction magik trick during the scamdemic. Promoted as relief for the common people, in reality it was another corrupt grift run by plutocrats. This, in turn, ended up justifying excessive central bank money printing and helped to accelerate the subsequent excessive inflation Americans are now experiencing.

Read “Fed Hack Jerome Powell: A Profile in Corruption and Conflict of Interest”

So hard to see this coming.

The purpose of Winter Watch is to expose the Sub-Zero hackery and kakistocracy, including those involved in and responsible for awful policy decisions. We’ve observed that such negative selection operatives tend to hide under rocks after their damage is done — and, in fact, they’re often promoted.

One such list of Sub-Zero kakistocrats can be found in an open letter from Nobel Laureates in support of the so called American Rescue Plan. It is signed by 17 recipients of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences:

  • George A. Akerlof, professor, Georgetown University
Yellen and Ackerlof in 2014 PHOTO: Business Insider

Akerlof is married to Fed Reserve mucky muck and Biden-appointed Secretary of Treasury Janet Yellen. He hails from the Georgetown and Berkeley university cesspools. His school or tradition is neo-Keynesian economics. He’s the recent author of “Identithy Economics.”

Curiously, one of his claims to fame was his 1993 tome “Looting: The Economic Underworld of Bankruptcy for Profit” that describes how, under certain conditions, owners of corporations will decide it is more profitable for them to personally “loot” the company and “extract value” from it instead of trying to make it grow and prosper. For example:

Bankruptcy for profit will occur if poor accounting, lax regulation, or low penalties for abuse give owners an incentive to pay themselves more than their firms are worth and then default on their debt obligations. Bankruptcy for profit occurs most commonly when a government guarantees a firm’s debt obligations.

Did he intend his book to be a cautionary tale or a how-to guide for the corrupt? Either way, despite his insights into rent-seeking and grifting behaviors, Akerlof signed off on the Rescue Plan anyway. What a titan you are, professor.

  • Sir Angus Deaton, professor, Princeton University

Deaton hangs his shingle as a professor of economics and international Affairs at Princeton School of Public and International Affairs. In 2015, he won that year’s Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. He was “delighted.”

Deaton, a British economist, described himself as “someone who’s concerned with the poor of the world and how people behave, and what gives them a good life.” He apparently has a sub-zero understanding of how rent-seeking stimulus and subsequent inflation ravages the lower classes.

  • Peter Diamond, professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Diamond (b. 1940) was born to a Jewish family in New York City. Like a turtle on a fence post, he was elevated at a very young age to an assistant professor and then associate professor positions at the U.C. Berkeley between 1963 and 1965, before joining the MIT faculty as an associate professor in 1966. Diamond was promoted to full professor in 1970 at age 30. Former U.S. Federal Reserve Bank Chairman Ben Bernanke was his student.

Nobel Laureate Peter Diamond (second from left) at a Nobel Banquet, Stockholm, Sweden, December 2010. PHOTO: An Economic View of the Environment

Diamond specialized in and advised on U.S. Social Security policy. In numerous journal articles and books, he presented analyses of social welfare programs in general and the American Social Security Administration in particular. He has frequently proposed policy adjustments, such as incremental but small increases in social security contributions. How that been working out for ya, Peter?

  • Robert Engle, professor emeritus and co-director of the Volatility and Risk Institute, New York University

Another boy wonder, Robert Engle, was an economics professor at MIT by the age of 27 (1969-1977).

Engle’s most important contribution was his discovery of a method for analyzing unpredictable movements in financial market prices and interest rates. How’s that going lately, professor?

He also developed a model showing economic cycles could be explained based on changes over time in people’s uncertainty about inflation. But he apparently failed to connect the dots of how hyper-stimulus and rampant fiscal spending combined with reckless money printing brought on today’s roaring inflation — yet another sub-zero fail.

  • Oliver Hart, professor, Harvard University

Classic made-man Oliver Hart was born in Britain to Philip D’Arcy Hart, a medical researcher, and Ruth Meyer, a gynecologist. Both his parents were Jewish. His father was a member of the Montagu family. He completed his doctoral dissertation at Princeton, titled “Essays in the economics of uncertainty” under the supervision of Michael Rothschild. He has been a professor and lecturer at “the usual suspects” schools MIT and Harvard.

  • Daniel Kahneman, professor, Princeton University
Daniel Kahneman on the power of slow thinking | The Sunday Times Magazine | The Sunday Times
Daniel Kahneman PHOTO: The Times

In 2015, “The Economist” magazine listed Daniel Kahneman as the seventh most-influential economist in the world. More of the same ol’, same ol’. Kahneman and his family moved to British Mandatory Palestine in 1948, just before the creation of the state of Israel.

In 1958, he went to the United States to study for his PhD in psychology from the U.C. Berkeley. His 1961 brainiac dissertation examined relationships between adjectives in the semantic differential and allowed him to “engage in two of [his] favorite pursuits: the analysis of complex correlational structures and FORTRAN programming.” Yes, really useful stuff.

  • Eric S. Maskin, professor, Harvard University
Eric S. Maskin
Eric S. Maskin PHOTO:

Maskin was born in New York City in 1950 to a Jewish family. Another fast-rising boy wonder. After earning a doctorate in applied mathematics, Maskin joined the faculty at MIT. In 1985, he returned to Harvard as the Louis Berkman professor of economics, where he remained until 2000. That year, he moved to the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.

In addition to his position at Princeton, Maskin is the director of the Jerusalem Summer School in Economic Theory at The Institute for Advanced Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Maskin’s claim to fame was to give endorsements to failed policies, game theory and the economics of incentives. How’s that workin’ out, professor?

  • Daniel McFadden, professor, University of California, Berkley

McFadden was born in 1937 in Raleigh, North Carolina. He attended the University of Minnesota, where he received a B.S. in physics, and a Ph.D. in behavioral science (economics). He joined the kakistocracy and usual-suspect schools, U.C.  Berkeley, and later MIT. He focused his research on choice behavior and the problem of linking economic theory and measurement.

In 1974, he introduced Conditional logit analysis, a statistical model for guessing the odds of an event happening. This had no value in assisting these hacks with forecasting the inflationary ravage and insolvency of 2022.

  • Paul Milgrom, professor, Stanford University

Paul Milgrom was born in Detroit in 1948, the second of four sons to Jewish parents.

Milgrom made several fundamental contributions to game theory in the 1980s and ’90s, including game-theoretic analysis of reputation formation, repeated games, supermodular games and learning in games. All totally worthless considering his endorsement of the 2021 policy fiasco drowning America. In a typical Eddie Haskell manner, he blames his failure on someone else — Putin!

  • Roger Myerson, professor, University of Chicago

Meyer (b. 1951) is another turtle-on-a-fencepost rapid riser. From 1976 to 2001, Myerson was a professor of economics at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, where he conducted much of his Nobel-winning research. He was visiting professor of economics at the University of Chicago from 1985 to 1986 and from 2000 to 2001. He became professor of economics at Chicago in 2001. Currently, he is the inaugural David L. Pearson Distinguished Service Professor of Global Conflict Studies at the University of Chicago.

He supposedly comes from the more conservative wing of macroeconomics. With that kind of resume, one would think you would know better, professor.

  • Edmund S. Phelps, professor and director of the Center on Capitalism and Society, Columbia University

Phelps came up with the failed theory on the link between employment, wage setting and inflation, leading to his influential 1968 paper “Money-Wage Dynamics and Labor Market Equilibrium” and others. The research contributed important insights in the microeconomics of the Phillips curve, including the role of expectations (in the form of adaptive expectations) and imperfect information in the setting of wages and prices.

It also introduced the concept of the natural rate of unemployment and argued that labor market equilibrium is independent of the rate of inflation, and so there’s no long run tradeoff between unemployment and inflation. These theories are like incendiary swamp gas in the current economic storm.

  • Paul Romer, professor, New York University
Roy Romer
Roy Romer PHOTO: University of Michigan

Romer is the son of former Colorado governor Roy Romer. Romer was chief economist and senior vice president of the World Bank. He is credited with the famous saying, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.”

He’s also supposedly some sort of “expert” on long-term economic growth. Hmm, I wonder.

  • William Sharpe, professor emeritus, Stanford University

It isn’t clear why Sharpe would add his name to the list of hacks recommending the failed hyper-stimulus of 2021. His forte is not in macroeconomics but in the field of investments, portfolio allocation and pension funds in particular. How’s that been working for your clients, professor?

  • Robert Shiller, professor, Yale University

Shiller is probably the best known of the group. He’s an alleged expert on asset prices, including bubbles. He called the 2000s housing bubble. As such, he should’ve known better on this go ’round. I think the pressure and criticism of his previous call got to him, and he chickened out or sold out and went quiet.

You’ve got some explaining to do, professor.

  • Christopher Sims, professor, Princeton University

Sims is yet another guy who professed to understand the direction of causality in central bank monetary policy. It confirmed the theories of monetarists like Milton Friedman in which shifts in the money supply affect inflation. However, it also showed that causality went both ways. Variables like interest rates and inflation also led to changes in the money supply.

Looks like another fail, dude. Where were you on this one?

  • Robert Solow, professor emeritus, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Solow is fuckin’ 97 years old, so maybe we should cut him some slack for signing onto this fiasco? Soslow was born into a Jewish family in 1924. However he’s been a mentor and teacher to some of the other clowns on this list, namely George Akerlof, Joseph Stiglitz, Peter Diamond and William Nordhaus.

He is ranked 23rd among economists on RePEc in terms of the strength of economists who have studied under him. This makes him, in large measure, responsible for the kakistocracy that has developed in his field.

  • Joseph Stiglitz, professor, Columbia University

I personally am friendly to Stiglitz’s views. Stiglitz was born in Gary, Indiana, to a Jewish family. Educated at Amherst, MIT and University of Chicago.

He’s known for his support of Georgist public finance theory and for his critical views on the management of globalization, of laissez-faire economists (who he labels as “free-market fundamentalists”), and of international institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. He criticized the Obama administration’s financial-industry rescue plan. He worked for the World Bank and was fired for being critical of its neo-liberalism. He said whoever designed the Obama administration’s bank rescue plan is “either in the pocket of the banks or they’re incompetent.”

Read: The Neoliberal Political Economy of the Organized Crime Syndicate

He gets the plutocrat looting aspect – except he rarely meets a spending program he doesn’t like. That’s his fail and has always been his fail. What were you thinking here, professor? Shame on you.

Alternative Takeaway: Another possibility is that the crash-and-burn outcome of the Rescue Plan is not illustrative of failure but was by design. Perhaps the takedown of the United States was The Plan all along. #clowardpiven

10 Comments on The Sub-Zero Hack Nobel Laureates Who Promoted the 2021 American ‘Rescue’ Plan

  1. “in the pocket of the Banks or incompetent!” I say Both! Also Obama is a maladjusted domineering creature who is intent on destroying America from within, as demonstrated
    by his actions and his impact and boss of Biden.

  2. I have commented on a similar issue as this before, and it’s worth raising the point again: so, by extension of your claim that these highly qualified economists are frauds, you’re clearly intimating that you know more than them in matters of economics? Is this correct?

    It’s quite curious but also astounding how with a mere stroke of a pen, so to speak, or in a couple of short paragraphs on each individual, you can dismiss a Princeton or MIT or Harvard fully tenured prof with decades of education, countless journal articles, and published books with some of the most prestigious printing presses (Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, etc etc). Don’t forget: these are not political hacks or political lobbyists. They’re experienced professors, so your criticism would have to bring out the heavy guns of macroeconomic analysis using fancy math to be convincing.

    Modern economics is a highly technical field relying extensively on statistical modelling and mathematics. It’s not your typical social science like sociology or psychology. Thus, to refute these people you would have to present a far more technical argument for your claims.

    • Instead of some how making it about me as a messenger, fundamentally I would ask what the outcomes have been from the policy endorsements and proposals of these so called experienced professors.

      I have warned about this for several years on these pages. The economy is a Ponzi scheme with extreme fiscal stimulus, low interest rates and zombie companies. Since the outcomes are bad in every sense, how is it that they should be spared a skewering by me or anybody else?

      I strongly reject and I am not impressed by your naïve assertion that these people are not hacks but are “mere academics”, but the readers can decide for themselves.

      Your last paragraph is a classic example of pilpuling to distract from the hard realities and the damage these kakistocratic operatives have contributed to.

      • I understand what you’re saying, and I’m not defending criminals of the predatorial class, or their lackeys (which you would classify these economists as).

        Perhaps, an analogy is apt here: if you’re going to claim that the Boeing 747 or Airbus 380 are subpar and unsafe airplanes, and that the engineers who designed them are frauds … well, you would have to get into detailed engineering involving aerodynamics, advanced physics, and so on, before dismissing the designers as quacks. Economics of the modern industrial state is even more complicated than a 747. Amazingly, despite the ups and down of the economic cycle and countless variables that affect them, these economies seem to work. It stands to reason that those at the helm know something about their profession.

        My ultimate point is this: because of the immense complexity of economics, it’s exceedingly difficult to make claims about the direction of the economy without getting down and dirty with complicated and abstruse formulas and modelling.

        • You are espousing the fallacy of appeal to authority. Effectively this means that if you aren’t some razzle dazzle brainiac or so called super cited individual just keep your damn mouth shut with the criticisms. Attentive layman can rightly see the outcomes and connect the dots and without computer models.

          That fallacy is counter to my nature, personality and warrior spirit. It also contributes to a Crime Syndicate controlled society and subsequent bad outcomes as they control the means of authority and can roll their egghead hacks out. Lastly, and the point of the post, is I have no respect for this posse of 17 authorities.

          • It’s easy. Just read Murray Rothbard to understand the theft these academics have done to us average Joes through fiat. Academics? Remember, Communism is some utopia that only works in “Academics” while totally dimissing evil human nature. Communism thrives in the minds of Academia. How did that work for you?

    • I couldn’t see whether you had a twinkle in your eye as you wrote your comment, but I’ll lend you the benefit of doubt and conclude you’re being wryly satirical.

Post a Comment

Winter Watch
%d bloggers like this: