Paul Krugman Has A Nobel Prize In Economics

And my dog doesn’t;

One would think, given the divergent outcomes, that a serious economist would advocate for countries to follow the successful example of northern Europe rather than the failed strategies of the south. Nobel laureate and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman doesn’t seem to see it that way. Throughout the crisis, Krugman has attempted to explain away or even mock the Baltic countries’ success even as they have continued to inconveniently disprove his arguments.

On the other hand, if an empty chair can win the Peace Prize…
(h/t Sean)

16 Replies to “Paul Krugman Has A Nobel Prize In Economics”

  1. From the article:
    ” Krugman is not, presumably, some kind of bizarre anti-Baltic bigot.”
    The Nemo2 edition:
    “Krugman is some kind of bizarre bigot.”
    There, that’s better. FIFY

  2. But, but, if micro-loans (support of which was Krugman’s original claim to fame, if I recall correctly) are good, then macro-loans must be better, and a world drowning in debt must be utopia!

  3. A really excellent article – outlining the two opposites. Stimulus, aka Obama’s plan versus infrastructural change and debt reduction (Harper, Romney). Which one works? Not the stimulus.

  4. Krugman is a fraud. There was a time even the finance people on PBS used to laugh at him. Now the left has raised him to sainthood simply becuase advocates continued and even increased spending.
    Compare his body of work with Milton Friedman’s. It is laughable.

  5. ct
    should it not be “…….excessive borrowing and spending……..” ?
    What’s that definition about insanity?
    Repeating the same actions over and over expecting a different result?
    All Obama, Krugman, Geithner, Bernanke, and the rest of the financial ‘gurus’ are doing, is finding a new credit card to max out, until they get a new one. Of course, never making a payment on the old one.
    What happens when they run out of credit cards?

  6. Nobel Prize winners:
    Yasser Arafat
    Jimmy Carter
    Desmond Tutu
    Paul Krugman
    Barack Obama
    Al Gore
    Kofi Anan
    Dalai Lama
    United Nations Peacekeeping Forces
    Amnesty International
    International Labour Organization
    Woodrow Wilson
    Theodore Roosevelt
    Thank goodness the Nobel Prize committee is completely unbiased when it comes to political ideology. Just like the media.

  7. Spending beyond your means is bad for you in the long run. Who could have known? Now US monetary policy will increase inflation, ceretus paribus.
    Higher interest rates surely result, causing declines in virtually all markets, debt, real estate and equities. Bada bing bada boom, the piper comes calling as the economy boomerangs with debt squeeze and the brakes suddenly come on. That is our future going forward so get ready for it.
    Inflation seems inevitable as baby boomers continue to drive down productivity; just get ready for higher interest rates and its deleterious effects. It will surely affect those on the margin, just able to afford a house, leveraged into risky investments or personal debt, and go from there. I don’t think we’ll end up with mortgages underwater (negative equity) or crash and burn markets, but there will be opportunities, that is blood on the streets.
    Especially after a major terrorist attack which I think we should brace ourselves for.

  8. doowleb@1:32 Well done! Kinda brings the whole “Nobel thing” into perspective, doesn’t it? Who’s next, Bashar al-Assad?

  9. I have a question…
    Why is Paul Krugman trying to bankrupt every government in the world?
    Seriously. What’s in it for him? Is it part of an evil plot for world domination or something?

  10. Not an economist but I can’t help but think that the race to devalue for trade advantage is going to create some wicked inflation. The U.S. has gone to selling way less bonds, instead having the Federal Reserve create a bunch more money, essentially stealing it from those holding U.S. money. Mad Man Mulcair may get his wish, a worthless dollar to help Ontario. Mind you everyone elses money will be worthless.

  11. ‘A really excellent article – outlining the two opposites. Stimulus, aka Obama’s plan versus infrastructural change and debt reduction (Harper, Romney). Which one works? Not the stimulus.’
    Posted by: ET at September 15, 2012 10:51 AM
    ET; You have confused what Willard Romney is granted (by msm) saying with what Dr. Ron Paul has been saying for years. Mit backs the Fed and the printing of fiat money.

  12. Can no one do basic arithmetic anymore? The article says that GDP fell by 24% during 2008-09. That’s a huge amount.
    Growth rates vary among the 3 countries from 5 to 8 percent. Even at 8%, no one has made up the ground they lost. Take a midpoint of 6.5%, and they are still almost 10% poorer than they were 5 years ago.
    Tell me one country in Western Europe or North America that would have tolerated this. Note that I’m not saying that what the Baltic countries did was wrong; I’m saying it is not possible in current Western democracies. Bambam, for all his obvious faults, has still seen miniscule nominal growth in US GDP (figures which I’ll admit are open to dispute), and he’s being hammered for being a lousy economic manager. If the US GDP was 10% lower today than it was when he was elected, his chance of re-election would be precisely zero.
    The increasingly delusional ET wrote, in another thread:
    Democracy is a political mode that empowers the majority. It is a political mode that gives a society that capacity for rapid, flexible decisions.
    The first part is correct. The second is insane. Democracy, as opposed to republican government, has devolved into a kleptocracy of those who can’t at the expense at those who can. Universal suffrage is a fine idea on superficial examination, but it fails in the event. The mere act of surviving into your 18th year shouldn’t give you the right to choose your country’s future, any more than working at the same company for 20 years should give you a seat on the board. Some privileges need to be earned.
    This idea has been debated elsewhere, and no one has put forth a perfect solution, but almost any qualification for voting – literacy, employment, national service – is better than the zero qualifications we have today. (I note, parenthetically, that the Democrats don’t even want you to prove who you are or where you live. Yeah, that’s a recipe for long term success.)
    Canada is lucky in that we have four left wing parties splitting the loony vote so that the Tories could take over. We are alone in this fortune. The rest of the West is doomed to failure by its relativist, uninformed majority.
    If history is any guide, this will only be resolved by war. Whether it’s between the neo-fascists and those who value freedom, or the Islamists and those who value freedom, matters are coming to a head. I hope the good side wins, but it’s not a sure thing by any stretch.

  13. Paul Kurgman: The People’s Economist
    Most people know that Americans benefit from high taxes, powerful unions,limited consumer choice, and strong government control …
    thepeoplescube.com/paul-krugman/

Navigation