Paul Krugman wins the Nobel prize for Economics

[Ma'ake]

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...mics-nobel/?em

Rumor was Phill Gramm, PhD, economic advisor to McCain, was supposed to win it, but his "whiner" explanation of the current financial problem diminished his standing among Nobel Economics committee members.

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...mics-nobel/?em

Rumor was Phill Gramm, PhD, economic advisor to McCain, was supposed to win it, but his "whiner" explanation of the current financial problem diminished his standing among Nobel Economics committee members.

Some of Krugman's positions in his blog and column are atrocious. But his ideas on trade in immerging economies are far-reaching and profound. I can still recall reading his work on the subject well over a decade ago. It seems to me, as an amateur, the prize is well deserved – notwithstanding his crappy blog.

[8ballrollin]

I re-read some of his short autobio again today. Two sections stuck out as interesting:

He thinks Robert Reich and many of Clinton's economic appointees were 'second-rate fools'...

In fact, however, key advisers to Clinton knew me from way back, and the memories were not friendly. Immediately after the election, Robert Reich -- the same policy entrepreneur I had attacked in 1983 -- was named head of the economic transition team. And to my dismay, it quickly became clear not only that I would be excluded from influence, which didn't bother me too much, but that the Clinton Administration was going to systematically prefer policy entrepreneurs to real experts. In particular, it became apparent that the dominant ideology of the new administration would be what I call "pop internationalism", a foolish analogy between international trade and corporate competition. And because no first-rate economists would or could accept this doctrine, the key positions were filled by second-rate people

And interesting take on his work that I think applies to any profession...

Perhaps in the end the question one should ask of any scholar is what purpose he feels his work serves...

We all want power, we all want success, but the ultimate reward is the simple joy of understanding.

http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/incidents.html

[il Padrino Ute]

The Nobel Committee has now lost all credibility.

First, Al Gore. Now a Keynesian hack.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

[Ma'ake]

Here's a good Krugman column:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_10593960

Notable quote:

"And last year, when the McCain campaign announced that the candidate had assembled ''an impressive collection of economists, professors, and prominent conservative policy leaders'' to advise him on economic policy, who was prominently featured? Kevin Hassett, the co-author of ''Dow 36,000.'' Enough said. "

[8ballrollin]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Here's a good Krugman column:

http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_10593960

Notable quote:

"And last year, when the McCain campaign announced that the candidate had assembled ''an impressive collection of economists, professors, and prominent conservative policy leaders'' to advise him on economic policy, who was prominently featured? Kevin Hassett, the co-author of ''Dow 36,000.'' Enough said. "

Or there is this one...

I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I’m not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/op...in&oref=slogin

[pelagius]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

The Nobel Committee has now lost all credibility.

First, Al Gore. Now a Keynesian hack.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

I don't read Krugman's columns so I don't know how bad his punditry may or may not be. But when he did research he did great stuff. Pathbreaking, elegant stuff. Along with 10-30 other people he is clearly worthy of the prize.

I don't know Krugman personally and I am always disappointed when someone I don't know personally wins (you know just so I can add to the list). But he is certainly deserving no matter what the secondary political motivations of the committee were.

[MikeWaters]

I don't think there should be a nobel prize for economics, when there is no nobel prize for clinical research in medicine, or health services research.

Then again, maybe economists need something to feel good about.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I don't think there should be a nobel prize for economics, when there is no nobel prize for clinical research in medicine, or health services research.

Then again, maybe economists need something to feel good about.

you aren't giving clinical clinical research in medicine, or health services research enough credit here. You're damning them with the comparison.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by pelagius

I don't read Krugman's columns so I don't know how bad his punditry may or may not be. But when he did research he did great stuff. Pathbreaking, elegant stuff. Along with 10-30 other people he is clearly worthy of the prize.

I don't know Krugman personally and I am always disappointed when someone I don't know personally wins (you know just so I can add to the list). But he is certainly deserving no matter what the secondary political motivations of the committee were.

Fair enough.

I was just under the assumption that science was supposed to be the primary reason for winning a Nobel Prize, rather than politics. Economics is a science with which I'm not very familiar, so perhaps he really is deserving of that prize.

I just like to taint things like that with my own view. It makes me feel better, ya know?