Paul Krugman wins Nobel price in Economics

maybe now he will get some respect.

THIS was in yesterdays AP newslines, Krugman wasnt even mentioned in this little rant. (Although I think the "meltdown" had some input in Krugmans selection


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hvgJXYzXRBOttYAflCSJumnfVXxQD93P1E5O0

Have you learned nothing in the last 8 years? For the other half of the political spectrum, this only goes to show what a bunch of biased, anti-American hacks the Nobel Prize committee has become. I could write the RNC's press release in my sleep!

Meanwhile, straight from the Nobel Prize website --

Here is the Academy's press release

A 4-page explanation of Krugman's work (pdf)

... and an essay on the scientific background of the prize (20 pages, wonky, and also pdf).

More than that -- they quite explicitly ruled him out:


Meltdowns are one of Krugman's specialties! (But apparently not the one he got the Nobel prize for.)

Excellent! Good for him!

He's the only economist I read because he's also the only one I understand.

Well good for Krugman! Always glad to see an American winning Nobel Prizes.

Hi McGentrix -- thanks for contradicting what I said about "the other half of the political spectrum"!

According to what I know about you-- Krugman is not a Good American.

You're Thomas-all-happy-with-himself today!

This is probably worth a mile or two on the treadmill to celebrate, doncha think?

Well, you would appear to not know much about me then.

While I disagree with his politics, that doesn't mean he is not an expert in the field of economics.

What the Nobel Prize committee secretary said: "Not only is he a stellar researcher ... but also he is an excellent expositor and that is clear both from textbooks but also, as many of you know, from his columns."

A Talk with Nobel Winner Krugman When He Was E&P's Columnist of the Year
By Dave Astor - E & P
Published: October 13, 2008 10:53 AM ET

Columnist/professor Paul Krugman, who just won the Nobel Prize for economics, was E&P's "Columnist of the Year" in 2002. Here's most of that story from six years ago:
----------------------------------------------

The intersection of politics and economics was big news in a year of rising joblessness, corporate scandals, and soaring deficits. "So much of the political landscape is dominated by economic questions," says Paul Krugman, who was smack in the middle of that intersection as a New York Times Op-Ed writer and prize-winning economist. Now the Princeton University professor is also E&P's columnist of the year.

With a clear, nonacademic writing style, Krugman appeals to many people who normally avoid economics like the plague -- even if they disagree with his political views. This year, Krugman used his high-profile Times forum and economic knowledge to skewer Bush-administration policies in columns with such titles as "The Bully's Pulpit" and "Crony Capitalism, USA." That made him a lightning rod read closely by both liberals and conservatives.

"I get a huge volume of mail," says Krugman, with the correspondence numbering in the hundreds some days. "It's more positive than negative, but very strong and very intense on both sides. And there's hate mail."

LA Weekly's John Powers wrote last week that Krugman is "the president's most effective establishment critic.... Because he's a renowned Princeton economist who actually understands markets and finance, nobody has more forcefully exposed Bush's lies about his tax plan, Social Security, and corporate reform. Naturally, this has made him a bete noire of the right, subject to frequent intellectual and personal attacks."

While Krugman's economic commentary probably didn't change many Bush-administration minds, it did help educate the opposition and the public -- a process that can sometimes pay dividends down the road. But why didn't he have more impact on this month's election results?

"I'd like to make a big difference, but I'm not sure I have much of a chance of doing that," says Krugman. "The New York Times may be the world's premier newspaper, but it's still read by less than 1% of the U.S. population. TV and Rush Limbaugh have much more of an audience." Then again, he adds, the Times has "one hundred times the audience an academic can expect to reach."

And Krugman's column does get wider circulation as part of the package sent to many of the 650 papers that subscribe to the New York Times News Service.

Krugman adds that his impact was blunted also because Republicans "were extremely successful at camouflage." He notes that polls suggest many Americans favor paying more attention to corporate reform and are against tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the wealthy. But Republicans were perceived as similar to Democrats on some key economic issues, says Krugman, while they diverted voters' attention with preparations for a possible war with Iraq.

The 49-year-old Krugman -- who joined the Times in 1999 -- has written for both academic and general-interest publications, authored and edited more than 20 books, and received the American Economic Association's prestigious John Bates Clark Medal in 1991 for his work rethinking international-trade theory. He taught at Yale University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stanford University before becoming a professor of economics and international affairs at Princeton in 2000.

Krugman says continuing as a professor not only helps give him the knowledge that goes into his column but also makes it easier for him psychologically to take strong Op-Ed stands. "In a sense, I'm moonlighting as a columnist," Krugman says. "I'm probably willing to say unpopular things more than people for whom journalism is their solo career."

Houston Chronicle "Outlook" Editor David Langworthy agrees, saying that Krugman may sometimes beat up too much on Bush but at least doesn't beat around the bush. "He has a strong point of view, which is a good thing for a columnist," observes Langworthy, adding: "With the economy very much in the news these days, it's perfect for us to run his column occasionally."

What does the White House think of Krugman? A Bush-administration spokesman returning an E&P call said: "He's not someone I would really comment on, but good luck with your story."

Although I agreed with Krugman's many opinions, even I disagreed with him once upon a blue moon. LOL

When are you changing your gravatar, Thomas?

Krugman is not as bad as your source suggests, Tico, but he is generally so negative that he cannot be depended on to even recognize anything positive, much less embrace it. And he has frequently been out of step with the opinions of other economists who eventually proved to be right.

The fact that he was the recipient of the prize testifies to his far left leaning temperament and mindset. It seems that stellar credentials are not a consideration, and that nobody in the middle or who tilts the least bit right is seriously considered for a Nobel prize these days.

Fox wrote:

Your statement proves you have no idea about economist's opinions.

So his "analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity" is out of step and has been proven wrong

You usually do better with your reading comprehension, Walter.

Okay. So the Nobel Prize was awarded for one those few moments where he was within the steps. (He should share it with those, isn't it?)