Back to Clive Crook's blog homepage
Congratulations to Paul Krugman
October 13, 2008
Warmest congratulations to Paul Krugman on getting the Nobel prize. It was overdue (but then it usually is). I can’t think of an economist who could match him at extracting deep insight from simple, ingeniously specified models–again and again, one thought, why did nobody else see this?–or whose forthcoming academic papers would arouse such excitement. He can be an irascible fellow. He often finds it hard to respect people he disagrees with. I think he is much too quick to accuse people of bad faith. But his detractors should not deceive themselves: he is a kind of genius.
As I’ve mused before, it was a significant loss to economics when he put scholarly work to one side to make himself the scourge of the Bush administration, not to mention an affront to the principle of comparative advantage. Economists of his quality are much harder to find than angry pundits, however effective, and serve a greater social purpose. An enlightened central planner would never have allowed it.
At least we can be sure that the prize won’t go to Paul’s head. As he pointed out a while back, the Nobel is a second-class award, conferring less distinction than the Clark medal. (Paul won that 16 years ago.)
1) Congratulations to Prof Krugman.
2) Was it really a significant loss to economics, or was Krugman past his prime — and realised this better than anyone else? This is not to detract from his significant academic achievements, but to point to what seems to be a sad fact of biology (economics is not the only dismal science): that as in sport, academic achievement usually reaches its zenith at a relatively early age.
3) “Krugman pointed out that the Noble is a second-class award.” Let us take that with a grain of salt, since it was said made BEFORE he won the Nobel (and could not have been 100% sure he would ever win it). In any case, no matter what anyone-striving-for-the-Nobel-but-yet-to-win-it would claim, there is no comparing the Nobel’s cachet value with anything else.
RCS
Posted by: Ron Cohen-Seban | October 14th, 2008 at 12:25 am | Report this commentPaul Krugman is a genius as well as a wonderful writer. Personally I am happy he “wastes” his genius on polemics with the common man and on issues of importance to the common man.
Posted by: Wendell Murray | October 14th, 2008 at 12:51 am | Report this commentHow very nice to see your post!
There are just a handful of blogs I read every day without fail, and Krugman’s and yours are two of them. I greatly value the insights both of you offer — and you both do so frequently!
Posted by: Geoff Brown | October 14th, 2008 at 3:29 am | Report this commentPaul Krugman is genius friend of not so lucky creatures of the world. He represents the thoughts of American society effectively to the world. I felt I was reading a different style when I first read his article on American Health Insuarnce. He has commendable honesty in his writings.
Posted by: satyadev | October 14th, 2008 at 7:22 am | Report this commentAt first, making one more comment about immigration in a blog about Paul Krugman might seem to be off topic. It is not.
Paul Krugman has written clearly and eloquently about the fact that the term “illegal alien” is merely a euphemism used by people who hate all Latin American immigrants, and that the campaign to force some 10-12 million Spanish-speaking men, women and children out of the country because they lack legal immigration status has little to do with national security, law enforcement, or economic considerations, and everything to do with racial prejudice.
What makes Paul Krugman such a great figure is not only his economic insight (something which laymen like myself are not equipped to understand fully in any event) but his insights into our society and, especially, the monumental hypocrisy and arrogance of the Bush administration and its apologists.
What a shame that the oped page that Krugman writes for has demeaned itself by giving space to a vapid Republican mediocrity such as David Brooks or a right wing neocon propagandist such as William Kristol, whose column last week with its advice to Sarah Palin to step up her slime attacks against Barack Obama (advice which she eagerly accepted) blurred whatever differences still remain between the New York Times on the one hand, and Fox News and the New York Post on the other.
Posted by: algasema | October 14th, 2008 at 9:13 am | Report this comment“As I’ve mused before, it was a significant loss to economics when he put scholarly work to one side to make himself the scourge of the Bush administration, not to mention an affront to the principle of comparative advantage. Economists of his quality are much harder to find than angry pundits, however effective, and serve a greater social purpose. An enlightened central planner would never have allowed it.”
Seriously? He is the one that warned of the coming housing bubble in 2005, when “economists” like you were raving about the wonders of deregulation. You are correct that Paul Krugman is a genius. If only more “serious” economists were “scourges” of the Bush administration, then maybe we wouldn’t be in this mess!
Posted by: Karl | October 14th, 2008 at 10:40 am | Report this commentPaul Krugman is a man of sense in a senseless world. He is a neo-keynesian but what the world needs today is neo-marxists.
Posted by: Toolmaker | October 14th, 2008 at 2:50 pm | Report this commentIm discovering new inovations so the ordinary public can find tactical & strategic ways of changing the behaviour of CEOs and Politicians.
One way of doing this is by changing the social economic consumer infrastructure and its meaning so that a revolution takes place, by changing the transcendant meaning of technological being which in turn transforms the weakend political and financial superstructure!
Kudos to Krugman. In a world where everything is politicized, he has embraced that reality with valid points and sound research to back everything he says. I see him as more of a political economist with the ability to bridge connections between the public and private sphere, drawing out the social ramifications and/or economic benefits of specific policy actions. He sees the micro thru a macro lense, a method that few self-proclaimed economists actually practice.
Posted by: Tucker | October 14th, 2008 at 6:09 pm | Report this commentThe real challenge is to build on his work to address the questions that still remain unanswered.
Posted by: Kalyan Singhal | October 14th, 2008 at 6:25 pm | Report this commentI am pleased that Paul Krugman has been accorded a Nobel Prize. I am also glad that he has decided to devote his considerable talent to analyzing and offering solutions to real world issues than wasting time in chasing phantom problems that academic economists often contrive for their continued survival. I am glad that he has decided not to bury himself in stupid experimental designs, time-series econometrics and other games that economists play!
Posted by: Michael Philipps | October 14th, 2008 at 6:29 pm | Report this commentA good guy and a sensible guy!!
Congratulations to Mr. Krugman. Well Deserved.
Concerning an earlier posting on Mr. Krugman’s views on immigration. I’d like to clarify that in fact in his writings he has stated :
1. The net benefits of U.S. immigration are very small and accrue mostly to the immigrants themselves and the wealthier businesses who hire them.
2.The worst-off native-born Americans are hurt by immigration — especially immigration from Mexico Because Mexican immigrants have much less education … they increase the supply of less-skilled labor, driving down the wages of the worst-paid Americans. The most authoritative recent study … by George Borjas and Lawrence Katz of Harvard, estimates that U.S. high school dropouts would earn as much as 8 percent more if it weren’t for Mexican immigration.
3. The American social safety net has more holes in it than it should — and low-skill immigrants threaten to unravel that safety net. Low-skill immigrants don’t pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the benefits they receive.
This is pure economics from a decidedly non-racist Nobel prize winning economist.
Posted by: James Dean | October 15th, 2008 at 3:59 am | Report this commentUnless I completely misunderstand James Dean’s above post, it seems to imply that mine accused the distinguished New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman, of being racist. If this was Mr. Dean’s meaning, nothing could possibly be more absurd.
My post made precisely the opposite point, namely that Krugman has consistently spoken out against the racism behind the right wing campaign to deport or force out every last man woman and child in this country illegally.
As for Krugman’s alleged conclusions concerning the economic effect of immigration by less skilled workers, legal or otherwise, this is something that economists will no doubt continue to debate until the end of time.
I would be interested in seeing what Mr. Dean thinks would happen to the US economy if 10-12 million illegal mainly Latino illegal workers suddenly went home tomorrow. It would probably make the Wall Street crash look like a picnic by comparison.
I am not aware that Krugman has ever written a single word in support of sending them home.
Posted by: algasema | October 15th, 2008 at 6:26 am | Report this commentYou completely misunderstand and I did not imply anything of the sort. My point was Mr. Krugman came to his conclusions as an economist with no racially biased agenda.
I do not believe the mass exodus of low paid workers would cause an economic catastrophe, but that would take some research to validate.
Posted by: James Dean | October 15th, 2008 at 8:33 am | Report this commentObviously, I must have misunderstood James Dean’s comment. My apologies. I entirely agree with him that there is not the slightest racial agenda in Paul Krugman’s writings on immigration.
However, Krugman has been both courageous and accurate in speaking out against the barely concealed racism that drives so much of the “enforcement only” movement against mainly Latino immigrants in the US.
I am sure Mr. Dean would agree that opposing racism, in whatever form, is the very opposite of having a “racial agenda”. Nor does pointing out that racism still exists in this country, or that we still have a long way to go to achieve a both racial and economic justice imply the slightest lack of patriotism.
My criticism of Mr. Dean’s posts is based on their insinuation that anyone who believes that America should keep striving to reach its ideal of a color-blind, fair and more equal society is somehow disloyal. If that is not his meaning, he has every opportunity to make that clearer than he has so far.
Posted by: algasema | October 15th, 2008 at 3:40 pm | Report this commentHurrah for Paul Krugman! I guess the Nobel Prize Committee is trying to make up for having given more Nobel Prizes to the Chicago School of economics (beginning with Milton Friedman) than any other school in the world. And for having recognized, with prize after prize, the very “architects” of this financial debacle in the first place. Better late than never in recognizing their mistake!
Posted by: magda | October 15th, 2008 at 6:47 pm | Report this comment