Monday, June 29, 2009
More Bluffing From Krugman
This is great; sometimes I really just love the Internet. Paul Krugman shoots his mouth off about an Arrow article, and Bryan Caplan and then David R. Henderson spank him. Naughty Nobelist!
Such a public comeuppance is only possible with the Internet. I was pretty sure Krugman was bluffing about the Arrow paper, but I don't think I ever actually read it. Yet now anyone he cares to investigate will see Krugman was bluffing.
What's really funny is that I'm coming to realize just how much he bluffs. Whenever he touches an area that I know--such as the economics of climate change, or the Austrian business cycle theory, or the Herbert Hoover record--it jumps out at me how unfair Krugman is to his intellectual opponents, and how (seemingly willfully) misleading his arguments are.
But as I read others in their areas of expertise, I realize Krugman bluffs there, too. Please tell me he was at least really awesome in trade (where he got his "Nobel").
Such a public comeuppance is only possible with the Internet. I was pretty sure Krugman was bluffing about the Arrow paper, but I don't think I ever actually read it. Yet now anyone he cares to investigate will see Krugman was bluffing.
What's really funny is that I'm coming to realize just how much he bluffs. Whenever he touches an area that I know--such as the economics of climate change, or the Austrian business cycle theory, or the Herbert Hoover record--it jumps out at me how unfair Krugman is to his intellectual opponents, and how (seemingly willfully) misleading his arguments are.
But as I read others in their areas of expertise, I realize Krugman bluffs there, too. Please tell me he was at least really awesome in trade (where he got his "Nobel").
Comments:
Have you read is recent editorial ("Betraying the Planet")? He's accusing those that don't agree with him of treason now. This guy is out of control!
Now I'm not the world's foremost expert on Krugman's trade stuff, but I did read some of it. The impression I got was that he pretty much took Ricardo's old ideas, added tons of equations, math, models and assorted smoke and mirrors and made it look acceptable to the math-fetish generation.
Anything interesting in his work is not original, and anything original (tons of math) is neither interesting nor useful.
Am I being unfair?
Anything interesting in his work is not original, and anything original (tons of math) is neither interesting nor useful.
Am I being unfair?
# posted by 
: June 30, 2009 at 4:17 AM
: June 30, 2009 at 4:17 AM
Anonymous, you are being completely fair. I recently posted one of his old papers regarding the so-called Asian tigers (published years ago in Foreign Affairs), and it made complete sense (but was hardly original thought)
Bob, do you remember the time you bluffed about the classic Coase paper being responsive to the arguments I was making related to climate change and compensation to victims?
I have the emails to jog your memory, if that helps.
More generally, you do have a serious bluffing problem when it comes to addressing my views. Remember the geoengineering bluff?
Remove the plank from your own eye first.
I have the emails to jog your memory, if that helps.
More generally, you do have a serious bluffing problem when it comes to addressing my views. Remember the geoengineering bluff?
Remove the plank from your own eye first.
Barkley Rosser pretty much suggests that Krugman got his Nobel mostly for the innovations original with others. You can google it.
Barkley Rosser: "I think it is important to note that [Krugman] got it for applying the Dixit-Stiglitz model to both trade and location theory. One alone would not suffice as he was beaten to the punch on this in both areas, by Brander and Spencer and Helpman in trade and by Masahisa Fujita in regional."
I think what we are seeing is Krugman cracking under the psychological stress of the facts highlighted by Rosser.
My personal struggle with de-Krug-structionism is the reason I stumbled upon mises, rockwell, and this excellent blog. He is way over adulated. That blasted Nobel is like some kind of knighthood. To most people, it means they don't have to think for themselves anymore because, hey--they listen to Krugman. It's so frustrating.
Keep up the great work!!!
Keep up the great work!!!
# posted by : July 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM
: July 1, 2009 at 12:15 PM
A few weeks ago I was extremely agitated after reading some data Krugman presented on his blog. It was very dishonest the way he present Japan's deflation and the U.S. depression era data. Around the same time Delong came along and said "Krugman is always right." My head exploded.
Yeah Krugman bluffs. He preys on your ignorance and laziness. He can now say "I am a Noble Prize winner and Ivy League economist. Respect my Authoritay!!!!!" For some reason economist have been playing along with this myth. It's good to see people actually speaking out. He damages the profession.
Post a Comment
Yeah Krugman bluffs. He preys on your ignorance and laziness. He can now say "I am a Noble Prize winner and Ivy League economist. Respect my Authoritay!!!!!" For some reason economist have been playing along with this myth. It's good to see people actually speaking out. He damages the profession.
# posted by : July 1, 2009 at 8:44 PM
: July 1, 2009 at 8:44 PM Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]