"Wenzel dismissing Krugman as a geographer is pretty funny. If Krugman is only qualified to talk about trade, then Wenzel certainly isn't qualified to talk about any part of economics." - Pseudonymous
"Funny" is one word for it.
Saturday, February 2, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
One response to this is that Wenzel is just favoring Hayek over Krugman because Hayek got his prize for business cycle theory - that Wenzel isn't claiming to know anything independently.
ReplyDeleteMaybe.
But I would say that Krugman's BPEA and QJE papers alone probably did more to advance macroeconomic thinking than all that Hayek ever wrote about macroeconomics put together.
Hey, but what qualifies Wenzel to even favor Hayek over Krugman?
DeleteYou get the point. I'm fine with reminding people that Krugman's Nobel was for trade as a gentle caveat that getting the Nobel doesn't mean 'the profession' endorses all of his macro scholarship. But the out-of-hand dismissal of Krugman by many in the blogosphere is really demonstrative of the anti-intellectualism that pervades policy discussion.
(By the way, don't forget this is a guy who called the Roth/Shapley Nobel an "[attempt] to advance central planning": http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/10/nobel-prize-in-economics-awarded-to.html)