yes, congratulations to paul krugman.

he has also written some very nice things about you, as well.

"And Krugman won it his way: He never retreated into the academy, never jealously insulated his expertise and insight from controversy because that would be safest for his reputation."

....

"That said, Krugman won for his work on international trade theory, not his columns or his irreplaceable blog posts throughout the course of the financial crisis."

???

The two are not in tension. He won for his academic work. But he did not protect the purity and broad support of that work by staying quiet for the next few decades in anticipation of a Nobel. Instead, he moved into the public sphere.

You realize, of course, that this is going to be taken on the right as further evidence that we academics have a horrific liberal bias, right? That means more home-schooling, more rants against east coast, ivy-league elites... we're so screwed as a nation. I'm sure Prof. Krugman's work is worthy of the Nobel, and I'm certainly happy for him. But this is just one more thing that will deepen the political divisions here.

Careful Ezra--

I admire Krugman's ideas and analysis of our current economic situation, but some economists may feel that the work for which he won the prize was not necessarily substantial enough for the Nobel and suspect that the Committee is making a political statement. It will be interesting to see what the academic reaction is, and whether Krugman was one of the guys expected to eventually win a Nobel prize.

In the meantime the UK newspapers are all reporting that the Nobel laureate supports the UK solution to the fiscal crisis--thus lending it (thank goodness) even more credibility.

I admire Krugman's ideas and analysis of our current economic situation, but some economists may feel that the work for which he won the prize was not necessarily substantial enough for the Nobel and suspect that the Committee is making a political statement. It will be interesting to see what the academic reaction is, and whether Krugman was one of the guys expected to eventually win a Nobel prize.

In the meantime the UK newspapers are all reporting that the Nobel laureate supports the UK solution to the fiscal crisis--thus lending it (thank goodness) even more credibility.

why am i not surprised at all that krugman, summers and bernanki are joined at the hip? they should certainly know the solution to the problem of the economic house of cards, since they are its architect. NOT.

But this is just one more thing that will deepen the political divisions here.

Then people have to learn to get over it and stop whining. The world can't hold itself hostage to worrying about whether extremists will decide to further push political divisions ever time we make a decision, however innocuous.

I want to echo Ezra's admiration for Paul Krugman for being a top-notch academic while also becoming a well-known "public intellectual." Too often aspirants to "public intellectual" status are either know-nothing columnists (what accomplishments of merit did George Will ever have?) or people who peaked early in their careers and spend the following decades trying to find something else to do (Carl Sagan). Krugman showed you can walk and chew gum at the same time.

While I cannot judge Krugman's work, what is clear is how much the Nobel Committee hates the Bush administration. Krugman's, Gore's, and Pinter's awards, the recent comments about US authors being too insular, and the dramatic non-win for Robert Gallo in physiology this year can _all_ be taken as comments on US policy. Pinter won soon after commenting strongly against the war. Scientists had long thought that Gallo, who discovered the first retrovirus (making HIV discovery possible) and was sometimes credited with co-discovering HIV (long story), would share a prize with Luc Montagnier, who shared the award this year with 2 other, non-American scientists.
Just one more way that the Bush adminstration has harmed Americans.

Congrats to Mr. Krugman.

It's worth point out, however, that the "Nobel Prize" in Economics isn't a real Nobel prize.

"It's worth point out, however, that the "Nobel Prize" in Economics isn't a real Nobel prize."
It's also worth pointing out that the president of the US isn't really "the leader of the free world"! :P
Nitpicking much today? Jesus...

Yes, Krugman was expected to win the Nobel. He won teh award for the best young economist, and was clearly in line for this award based on his work as an economist.

As Ezra notes, some academics felt he had made himself too "controversial."

Clearly, the Swedish didn't. The prize is specifically for his work on trade, but they are also making a political statement-- as they often do--as they did with Gore and with Stiglitz.

They could have waited a couple of years before giving it to Krugman. (He indicates that this is what he himself expected.) Giving him to it now, is a statement about the Bush administration. And I welcome it.

Beginning with Iraq, Krugman has stood up for what he thought was right. Academics should be rewarded for doing that. Otherwise, they will simply retreat into their narow corners in the academy.

Considering the current economic meltdown and the clear awareness that neo-con economics are at its center, only a idiot would accuse someone who opposes bushonomics as merely a partisan.

Krugman made observations which have been proven.

Vanessa -- Yes, Krugman had long been widely expected to eventually get the Nobel (as he has himself acknowledged), and this was already the case before he started writing in the NY Times. Unfortunately, we're going to have to put up with the whining of the obscurantist freaks who, sadly, have taken over the Republican party.

...some economists may feel that the work for which he won the prize was not necessarily substantial enough for the Nobel and suspect that the Committee is making a political statement.

Ya' *think*??

ALGORE set the new precendece. Now, it seems, you must be of the hard left critical of conservatives to qualify for consideration.

Bottom line is the day of the Nobel Prize going to some selfless unknown toiling away for the betterment of mankind is over. Now it's political.

Didn't mean to post anonymously in the 2nd comment.

Actually, per Tabbarok's summary of new trade theory, I think it's kind of important separating Krugman's more varied "public intellectual" persona from his concentrated work in econ theory. It might do him more credit rather than the option, which allows dunderheads to politicize (and discredit) his work as whole.

This goes double if what mz wrote is true.

kthxbai

It's also worth pointing out that the president of the US isn't really "the leader of the free world"!

I agree!

ALGORE set the new precendece.

I have asked this before and I'm going to ask it again. Could one of you right-wingers please explain to me exactly why it is hilarious to spell Al Gore's name as if it were one word? I'm genuinely curious.

[Al Gore] set the ... precedent (edited for coherence)

First of all, ElV, you are referring to the Nobel Peace prize. Next, the Nobel Peace Prize has always been political: was Aung San Suu Kyi really the person who made the most contributions to peace in 1991? No, but the committee wanted to recognize her non-violent pro-democracy struggle in Burma. Was there something special and specific that Elie Wiesel did in 1986 to merit his Nobel Peace price? Not, exactly (maybe it was telling Reagan not to lay a wreath at Bitburg in 1985?), but he was a good messenger for peace in his own right.

The conservative outrage over Krugman's award for Economics will be hilarious because, quite simply, he's winning his award for work promoting free trade. It just goes to show how, ultimately, ungrateful right-wingers are. Thankfully, Krugman's life has been spent doing quality work rather than worrying about what right-wingers think of him. It allows him to be right about things rather than worry about what might happen to him if he falls astray from the right-wing doctrine.

Sure, it's just fun.....Kinda like the left uses "teh" as in "teh gay" instead of just saying the man's a queer.

Hope this helps!

The conservative outrage over Krugman's award for Economics will be hilarious because, quite simply, he's winning his award for work promoting free trade.

This is why conservative outrage over Krugman in general is heaping load of stupid. It's not as if he's a raving socialist in his NYT columns.

Sure, it's just fun.....Kinda like the left uses "teh" as in "teh gay" instead of just saying the man's a queer.

Mmkay. I think the "teh gay" thing is supposed to be insinuating that people who hate gays are sub-literate or something. I guess what I'm confused by is the fact that right-wing humor usually consists of just straightforward insults (e.g. Ann Coulter, who many right-wingers believe to be funny, calling John Edwards a fag (not so much, it turns out!)). But "Algore" doesn't really seem to mock or insult Al Gore in any way.

But "Algore" doesn't really seem to mock or insult Al Gore in any way.

It's the "high road". Try it sometime, Dweebus.

Hey, I never thought John Edwards was a fag. Pssssst...it's Barney Frank...complete with a lisp!

It's the "high road". Try it sometime, Dweebus.

Of all of your comments on this blog, this one might be my very favorite.

It's the "high road". Try it sometime, Dweebus.

So, wait, it's not funny, and it's not mocking, and it's not even a common type so... what's the point?

Seriously, when you want to do something "as a joke," make sure it's funny. Just some advice.

What I want to know is: is he a serious candidate for Secretary of the Treasury or Chairman of the Federal Reserve in an Obama administration?

He's by far the highest profile liberal economist, but he had some issues with the campaign while in the primaries.

He's a gadfly, which inevitably implies that he's going to shoot out a lot of half-thought out ideas on various issues. His volume, however, is enormous, and he manages to do just enough critical thinking and analysis to balance out his more vapid musings.

I hope this prize will give his suggestions about how the U.S. can pursue policies to fix its current trade deficit more weight. Use that pulpit, Paul!

In the meantime, Vajima's hoping for a No-Balls Bigot Prize for Texan Twats.

some economists may feel that the work for which he won the prize was not necessarily substantial enough for the Nobel

Well, that's a variant on 'some people say'. I mean, what's the argument here? The committee was going to reward the efficient markets hypothesis?

What I want to know is: is he a serious candidate for Secretary of the Treasury or Chairman of the Federal Reserve in an Obama administration

I'd hope that if offered, he'd refuse. But it's not likely: Jason Furman and Austan Goolsbee signal a different tack. And of course, Krugman was considered Bad Neoliberal back in the 90s.

ed hardy ed hardy clothing
ed hardy clothing