Paul Krugman Wins Economics Nobel

[Ordie]

October 13, 2008, 7:50 am
Paul Krugman Wins Economics Nobel

By Catherine Rampell (http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/author/catherine-rampell/)Paul Krugman (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/opinion/KRUGMAN-BIO.html), a professor at Princeton University and an Op-Ed columnist for The New York Times, was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences on Monday.
“It’s been an extremely weird day, but weird in a positive way,” Mr. Krugman said in an interview on his way to a Washington meeting for the Group of Thirty, an international body from the public and private sectors that discusses international economics. He said he was mostly “preoccupied with the hassles” of trying to make all his scheduled meetings today and answer a constantly-ringing cell phone.
Mr. Krugman received the award for his work on international trade and economic geography. In particular, the prize committee lauded his work for “having shown the effects of economies of scale on trade patterns and on the location of economic activity.” He has developed models that explain observed patterns of trade between countries, as well as what goods are produced where and why. Traditional trade theory assumes that countries are different and will exchange different kinds of goods with each other; Mr. Krugman’s theories have explained why worldwide trade is dominated by a few countries that are similar to each other, and why some countries might import the same kinds of goods that it exports.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/09/18/opinion/ts-krugman-190.jpgPaul Krugman
“There was something very beautiful about the old existing trade theory, and its ability to capture the world in a surprisingly simple conceptual framework,” Mr. Krugman said. “And then I realized that some of the new insights coming through in industrial organization could be applied to international trade.”
Mr. Krugman wrote his dissertation, however, on international finance, and credits his late MIT professor Rudiger Dornbusch for pushing him to study international trade.
“I went to visit him one snowy day in early 1978 and described to him what I’d been thinking about,” Mr. Krugman said. “He turned to me and said, ‘You’ve got to write about that.’”
Mr. Krugman has been an Op-Ed columnist at the New York Times since 1999. A collection of his recent columns can be found here (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html).
“For economists, this is a validation but not news. We know what each other have been up to,” Mr. Krugman said. “For readers of the column, maybe they will read a little more carefully when I’m being economistic, or maybe have a little more tolerance when I’m being boring.”
He said that he does not expect his critics to let him off any easier because of his new accolade, though.
“I think we’ve learned this when we see Joe Stiglitz writing,” Mr. Krugman said, referring to the winner of the economics Nobel in 2001. “I haven’t noticed him getting an easy time. People just say, ‘Sure, he’s a great Nobel laureate and he’s very smart, but he still doesn’t know what he’s talking about in this situation.’ I’m sure I’ll get the same thing.”
In 1991 Mr. Krugman received the John Bates Clark medal, a prize given every two years to “that economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge.”
Mr. Krugman follows a number of Clark medal recipients who have gone on to win a Nobel, including Mr. Stiglitz.
“To be absolutely, totally honest I thought this day might come someday, but I was absolutely convinced it wasn’t going to be this day,” Mr. Krugman said. “I know people who live their lives waiting for this call, and it’s not good for the soul. So I put it out of my mind and stopped thinking about it.”
He said he didn’t actually know which day the winner’s name would be released until a colleague told him last week.
Mr. Krugman continues to teach at Princeton. This semester Mr. Krugman is teaching a small graduate-level course on international monetary policy and theory, covering such timely subjects as international liquidity crises. In recent years he has also taught courses on the welfare state and international trade, as well as all-freshman seminars on various economic topics.
Monday’s award is the last of the six prizes and is not one of the original Nobels, but was created in 1968 by the Swedish central bank in Alfred Nobel’s memory. Mr. Krugman was the only winner of the award, which includes a prize of about $1.4 million.


Source:http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/paul-krugman-wins-economics-nobel/?hp

[matthew.manhorn]

No other worthy candidates this year.

[tluassa]

Fox News (my ol´ pal Bill O Reilly) on him, August 7, 2008.

Have fun

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3eTa2v2ZfM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3eTa2v2ZfM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3eTa2v2ZfM

[Invisigoth]

Fox News (my ol´ pal Bill O Reilly) on him, August 7, 2008.

Have fun

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3eTa2v2ZfM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x3eTa2v2ZfM&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3eTa2v2ZfM

O'Reilly is such an idiot, the guy couldn't tell his **** from his balls if he had a book on it, and then he wants to lecture other people on economics? Puleasssse.

[Lefty]

Cool, he wrote my college Macro Econ textbook!


and O'Rielly is an assclown.

[teoretikern]

...

His Geography and Trade (http://www.amazon.com/Geography-Trade-Gaston-Eyskens-Lectures/dp/0262610868/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223972853&sr=8-1) is very excellent, so it is very possible he deserves this prize.

But I'm not so sure his more political writings, like Peddling Prosperity (http://www.amazon.com/Peddling-Prosperity-Economic-Diminished-Expectations/dp/0393312925/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223972988&sr=8-1), has the same quality.

[Kilgor]

4 years of growth hey bill, its called a f8cking bubble you clown.

[Karry]

Compared to just your plain "economy" - macro economy is more of an ideology than a science. Basically you raise a set of postulates and ideals and then build up the alleged supports for those postulates, instead of the other way around.

Naturally, this principle doesnt mean that those postulates are actually wrong, per se.

[kamaz]

he's a Keynesian anti-money market theorist, an academician, so offcourse the leftist-bent NObel committee would nominate him. The Nobel prize in the last 20 years has become a joke, since it is awarded to leftists or anyone with anti-American views. this is a fact.

heres an example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12orr.html?scp=1&sq=nobel%20poet&st=cse


the only field that the Nobel committee seems to be not as biased is the science (bio/chem)

[Moledet]

kamaz, check 2005 winner in Economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Aumann

"Aumann has also appeared extensively on Israeli media claiming that giving land to the Arabs is wrong based on the science behind game theory."
Too bad that a professor dealing with decision making and won a Nobel prize for it is never asked to give advices to knesset members.

[Jobu]

A leftist was given a prize?

Wow, what a great achievement for him to be recognized by other leftists.

[Laworkerbee]

he's a Keynesian anti-money market theorist, an academician, so offcourse the leftist-bent NObel committee would nominate him. The Nobel prize in the last 20 years has become a joke, since it is awarded to leftists or anyone with anti-American views. this is a fact.

heres an example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12orr.html?scp=1&sq=nobel%20poet&st=cse


the only field that the Nobel committee seems to be not as biased is the science (bio/chem)

X2 F*ck the Nobel.

[teoretikern]

he's a Keynesian anti-money market theorist, an academician, so offcourse the leftist-bent NObel committee would nominate him. The Nobel prize in the last 20 years has become a joke, since it is awarded to leftists or anyone with anti-American views. this is a fact.

heres an example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12orr.html?scp=1&sq=nobel%20poet&st=cse


the only field that the Nobel committee seems to be not as biased is the science (bio/chem)


The people that award the prize in litterature are not the same that award in economics. In economics we find winners like Coase, Sen, Buchanan, Auman, Mundell, Gary Becker, Douglas North, Phelps; people I don't think are that Keynesian. Leftists in Sweden hate Sen.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/all/index.html

In litterature it is the so called Swedish Academy that is responsible for choosing leftists, like Doris Lessing. :cantbeli:

[kamaz]

The people that award the prize in litterature are not the same that award in economics. In economics we find winners like Coase, Sen, Buchanan, Auman, Mundell, Gary Becker, Douglas North, Phelps; people I don't think are that Keynesian. Leftists in Sweden hate Sen.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/lists/all/index.html

In litterature it is the so called Swedish Academy that is responsible for choosing leftists, like Doris Lessing. :cantbeli:

I actually think Doris Lessing deserves a nobel, despite her dopey leftist political views. Same with Harold Pinter. It would be understandable if the Nobel committe actually gave someone from centrist/right field the prize (in literature). But this never happens. There are dozens of American writers who should have won the prize each year, yet this never happens. The Nobel committee is laughable.

[Thor]

he's a Keynesian anti-money market theorist, an academician, so offcourse the leftist-bent NObel committee would nominate him. The Nobel prize in the last 20 years has become a joke, since it is awarded to leftists or anyone with anti-American views. this is a fact.

heres an example:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/weekinreview/12orr.html?scp=1&sq=nobel%20poet&st=cse


the only field that the Nobel committee seems to be not as biased is the science (bio/chem)
Are you dumb for real?

- The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is awarded by Sveriges Riksbank (Central Bank of Sweden). It was not in Nobel's will but was added later. Leftists constantly argue that the prize should be abolished, because they hate it and the people who receive it!

- The Nobel Prize in Literature is awarded by Svenska Akademien (Swedish Academy), a totally different institution. Their name lacks a "Royal" prefix since the king once wanted to stress it's independence. Newsflash for you, the world's intellectual elite is leftist!

- The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine is awarded by Karolinska Institutet, a prestigeous medical university (was stripped of it's Royal prefix by leftists in 1968).

- The Nobel Prizes in Physics and Chemistry are both awarded by Kungliga Vetenskapsakademien (Royal Academy of Sciences).

- The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee who are appointed by the Norwegian Parliament. This prize of course has a clear political undertone. At the time of Alfred Nobel's death Norway was in a personal union with Sweden and did not have a foreign politics of it's own. Hence why they were deemed suitable.

[Macs.]

I love you guys.

Tell me when you found the lefty boogieman. He is the one who is responsible for everything you don't agree with.

GOO MCCAIN YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

[Thor]

Leftists have destroyed my country, so of course there is a bit of... uhm, bitterness.

[Laworkerbee]

I love you guys.

I love you too and am ready for teh ***.

[Kilgor]

I love you guys.

Tell me when you found the lefty boogieman. He is the one who is responsible for everything you don't agree with.

GOO MCCAIN YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

I heard he's a arab that will raise taxes.

[bestefar]

No other worthy candidates this year.

You must be joking !!

This years candidate was a good choice IMHO

[bestefar]

Leftists have destroyed my country, so of course there is a bit of... uhm, bitterness.


and which country are you talking about ??

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

he's a Keynesian anti-money market theorist, an academician, so offcourse the leftist-bent NObel committee would nominate him. The Nobel prize in the last 20 years has become a joke, since it is awarded to leftists or anyone with anti-American views. this is a fact.



Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps society is changing? In the past 100 years there has been more bloodshed then at any other point in human history.

Many of the ideals of the left are there to try to avoid the reasons and conditions that have lead to this destruction.

Do you think the likes of Stalin and Hitler would have come to power if the lower classes were properly provided for? IE better working conditions, wages, education and health care?

Do you think WW1 would have occurred if Bosnia was a free, prosperous democratic country?

As loony as the left can be at times it has and will continue to do a better job at preventing war then conservative governments who only "Look after their own"

[Gat0r]

Ugh what do you know a Keynsian economist, buddies with central bankers get a nobel for economics, yeah he wrote my macroeconomics book as well.

Krugman and the Nobel Fraud by William L. Anderson
http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson229.html

[bestefar]

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps society is changing? In the past 100 years there has been more bloodshed then at any other point in human history.

Unfortunately USA has had a lion's share.

Many of the ideals of the left are there to try to avoid the reasons and conditions that have lead to this destruction.

Do you think the likes of Stalin and Hitler would have come to power if the lower classes were properly provided for? IE better working conditions, wages, education and health care?

Do you think WW1 would have occurred if Bosnia was a free, prosperous democratic country?

As loony as the left can be at times it has and will continue to do a better job at preventing war then conservative governments who only "Look after their own"

Hard to argue against that !!

[Kilgor]

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps society is changing? In the past 100 years there has been more bloodshed then at any other point in human history.

Many of the ideals of the left are there to try to avoid the reasons and conditions that have lead to this destruction.

Do you think the likes of Stalin and Hitler would have come to power if the lower classes were properly provided for? IE better working conditions, wages, education and health care?

Do you think WW1 would have occurred if Bosnia was a free, prosperous democratic country?

As loony as the left can be at times it has and will continue to do a better job at preventing war then conservative governments who only "Look after their own"

Much of this bloodshed has been the perversion of leftist ideologies. We know what's good for you, and we'll put a bullet in your head to prove it.

[plato]

Fox News (my ol´ pal Bill O Reilly) on him, August 7, 2008.

Have fun


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3eTa2v2ZfM

this is a better video: (look at Paul Krugman at about 4:59, lol)

http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/MUOFTPbxuWA

[teoretikern]

Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps society is changing? In the past 100 years there has been more bloodshed then at any other point in human history.

Many of the ideals of the left are there to try to avoid the reasons and conditions that have lead to this destruction.

Do you think the likes of Stalin and Hitler would have come to power if the lower classes were properly provided for? IE better working conditions, wages, education and health care?

Do you think WW1 would have occurred if Bosnia was a free, prosperous democratic country?

As loony as the left can be at times it has and will continue to do a better job at preventing war then conservative governments who only "Look after their own"

One ever present idol among leftists is Karl Marx. Lenin studied him carefully and when he did his coup in 1917 he tried to implement Marx's ideas. But Marx and Engels did not have any blueprint how to build socialism, they only said it would be very easy, because all workers will have one will.

But in Russia in 1917 there never existed any "the united will of the people", and personally I don't think it will never exist but only in a few political areas (and of course in the minds of leftists). The result was a famine, cannibalism and far more numbers of prisoners than under The Tzar. The number of Tzarist prisoners never reached, at it's peak, 190 000, but under socialist governments, that did follow writings that were supposed to be "good" for the people, the number reached millions.

[matthew.manhorn]

Revolutions contradict Marx's philosophy.

[brainplay]

Many of the ideals of the left are there to try to avoid the reasons and conditions that have lead to this destruction.

Do you think the likes of Stalin and Hitler would have come to power if the lower classes were properly provided for? IE better working conditions, wages, education and health care?

I was under the impression that he came into power offering just that. He gave the country "hope" and the impression of a greater future.



As loony as the left can be at times it has and will continue to do a better job at preventing war then conservative governments who only "Look after their own"

That statement is false through and through but has been waved about handily despite a history of hawkish liberals. Grabbing your ankles in the hopes of appeasement is not the same as being in favor of avoiding a war while running government efficiently.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I was under the impression that he came into power offering just that. He gave the country "hope" and the impression of a greater future.

Exactly. The lower classes in these instances were getting hammered a number of different ways. Depression, massive unemployment, poor access to social programs and education. Both men used this as their selling slogan.

However todays lefties have been pretty successful in ensuring the conditions that were present then have largely been removed from society.

That statement is false through and through but has been waved about handily despite a history of hawkish liberals. Grabbing your ankles in the hopes of appeasement is not the same as being in favor of avoiding a war while running government efficiently.

Appeasement is one thing. Delaying war to be prepared is another. Remember in the late 1930's the world is coming to grips with a global depression, arms budgets have been slashed. Sure lets go to war of the Ancshluss (sp) with Austria. WW1 was not that far away and they all knew the consequences of going to war ill prepared.

[brainplay]

However todays lefties have been pretty successful in ensuring the conditions that were present then have largely been removed from society.

Last time I checked, thats been pretty bipartisan along the lines. The lefties have no corner in the market on improving the welfare of its citizens. Making sure that they never have to take any personal responsibility for any of that is another story. But then "nanny" states of mind are the new fad.