More economists react to Krugman disaster
Writing by abuhatem on Tuesday, 14 of October , 2008 at 8:35 pm
Very sad news for the Nobel Prize in economics, which is rewarded by a Swedish central bank anyway (unlike the other Nobel prizes) and hence already discredited. Some good economic commentary on the Krugman disaster today:
Russell Roberts at Cafe Hayek:
I’ve talked to a number of people who are depressed and angry at Krugman’s prize.
For me, it is just another reminder that those of us who believe in liberty are in for a long time in the intellectual wilderness. Today’s intellectual climate is a taste of what it must have been like to believe in liberty in 1933, or what it must have been like to be Milton Friedman in say, 1962.
I think things are much better today. We have many more outlets for spreading the virtues of freedom than we had in the past. I take solace in the fact that the average American today has a much richer understanding of the case for liberty today.
Economist Peter Woekette at the wonderful blog The Austrian Economists:
I will be writing a lot more about this, but the Swedes just made perhaps the worst decision in the history of the prize today in naming Paul Krugman the 2008 award winner. It is not that Krugman’s work is entirely without merit, but it always had major problems with it. Right now I have to get over my shock and horror and write a commissioned piece on this. But today I would say is a sad day for economics, not a day to be celebrated. Mises supposedly said during his dying days that he hoped for another Hayek, as I am picking up my jaw from the floor I am hoping for another Samuelson or Arrow to get the award rather the hackonomics that was just honored.
Woekette has a much less passionate, and much more intellectual critique in today’s Forbes Magazine.
Meanwhile, one of my favorite economists Bill Anderson also reacts at Forbes Magazine:
This is not as tragic a moment in western civilization as the sacking of Constantinople in 1453 or the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, but it suffices as one of those sad moments we will regret over time…
Thus, Krugman believes the problem is that the Bush administration is not socialist enough, which makes it ideologically “free market.” If Obama is elected and Krugman receives a high position in his administration, we shall see if Krugman becomes the first commissar who makes socialism work. I’ll be betting against him.
And instead, Anderson offers an actually sane candidate for the position:
Once again, the Great Jeffrey Miron comes through. Unlike Paul “The Fraud” Krugman, Miron actually does understand financial markets and the ramifications of the current policies.
If you want to read something clear, concise, and on-target, read Miron.
Bob Higgs of the Independent Institute laments Krugman’s nomination as well, after demonstrating that Krugman truly does not understand trade theory he says:
For economists who would like the Nobel Prize to mean something, today is a very sad day. Besides making a travesty of the prize, Krugman’s selection constitutes an insult to the few excellent economists (I am thinking especially of F. A. Hayek and James Buchanan) who have received the prize in the past.
Congressman Dr. Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty gives the funniest and most succinct analysis:
Krugman wins Nobel prize, Hayek turns over in grave. Yup, humanity is doomed.
Category: Economics
- Add this post to
- Del.icio.us -
- Meneame -
- Digg
No comments yet.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
