Despite the "he said she said" that passes for journalistic objectivity these days, there is still an objective reality, and reality has favored the left of late.

I actually respect and like his writing and thinking. I met him once in Austin. A very personable and smart guy.

But a great economist. His articles shine when discussing economics, but are otherwise somewhat middling.

He should really stick to his knitting, especially now.

Congratulations to him.

Sure, he leaned left over the past few years. But, he was the first 'real-world' economist my professors encouraged us to read and discuss while I was getting my undergraduate degree. There's something to be said, and some recognition to be deserved, from Krugman's ability to parse complicated economic issues concisely and with clarity.

If Milty Friedman gets to have one, Paul does too. Economics: The science where everybody is right, er, wrong, er... Whatever.

Vindication is sweet.

Take away Milty's and pound one more nail in to his coffin.

Economics is not something that can be summed up in a single slogan. The Nobel Prize is awarded for specific research, not for one's overall economic or political theory, and certainly not for their overall accomplishments as a person. Friedman got the award for his analysis of consumption and monetary history. Krugman got it for his work on trade theory and economic geography. I am no economist, but given the complexity of the field, I'm sure the two agreed on many fundamentals.

There is also the matter of the passage of time. Friedman's theory seemed to work well directly following the crises of the 70's. After the recent crash, Krugman's ideas seem to be right. But it may very well be possible that in a few decades his current recommendations may have undesirable consequences, and that a new model will emerge. The Nobel Committee is not an oracle.

Krugman has no real accomplishments outside of shilling for the Clintons and the globalization movement.

Slogon? Did I really sound that stupid? Or is it just Monday?

Thanks for the clarification.

P.S. I think the Turner prized is so much more fun, don't you think?

Anybody who doesn't adhere to the talking points handed down from on high is a "partisan" of the other side. Given just how badly the not-so-conservatives in that party have handled this country's financial affairs Krugman couldn't have been right as much of the time as he has and not sounded like a "partisan". Has anyone looked to see how often Krugman has disagreed with the Dems economic platforms in the last 8 years?

Congratulations, Dr. Krugman. Today, the dismal science will be just a little less dismal.

See you on your blog a little later.

First Jed Bartlett and now Paul Krugman.

Good times to be a liberal.

Not Deserved Krugman has no real accomplishments outside of shilling for the Clintons and the globalization movement.

The selection of Krugman at this time, under these circumstances, with banks collapsing and markets tanking, very much suggests that the Swedish Academy was maybe sending a message. The bitterness of the failed and discredited corporatists of the radical right makes Dr. Krugman's triumph all the sweeter.

Thanks for slinking by, neocon. On your way out, try not to get stepped on.

I haven't been this pleased since Bush Sr. sent a message to Bush Jr. by selecting Teddy Kennedy, prime Dubya detractor, for the "George Bush Award for Excellence in Public Service".

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5011.htm

Now that was a jaw-dropper.

Heh heh heh.

Take away Milty's and pound one more nail in to his coffin.

Even the Chicago School high priests of Milton Friedman avoid mentioning his name these days. Surprise surprise! - they're all Keynsians again. But even Friedman had his lucid moments:

The combination of economic and political power in the same hands is a sure recipe for tyranny.

Milton Friedman, Free to Choose

The bitterness of the failed and discredited corporatists of the radical right makes Dr. Krugman's triumph all the sweeter.

Radical right? Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall and signed NAFTA into law, and these market *reforms* were supported wholeheartedly by Paul Krugman and other neo-liberals.

Rewarding one of the architects of this economic disaster with a Nobel Prize for economics is nothing short of madness.

Clinton repealed Glass-Steagall and signed NAFTA into law, and these market *reforms* were supported wholeheartedly by Paul Krugman and other neo-liberals.

Hardly Clinton's and Krugman's fault that your neocons abused NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, eh? Just because it's not illegal to jump into a volcano doesn't mean you should jump into volcanoes, now does it?

And Krugman isn't a 'neo-liberal'. You're accusing him of being in the same camp with you Bushites, which even you would have to admit is rather stupid.

Many kudos to Krugman!! He's really the only reason why I go to the New York Times website.

Hardly Clinton's and Krugman's fault that your neocons abused NAFTA and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, eh?

Big business - not neo-con politicians - were the ones who took advantage of de-regulation, and phony liberals like Krugman, Al Gore, and the Clintons are the people most responsible for these bad policies, like it or not.

BTW, I am a progressive, not a neo-con. It is apparent, though, that that you are a yellow dog Democrat with no regard for the truth.

Krugman isn't a 'neo-liberal'. You're accusing him of being in the same camp with you Bushites, which even you would have to admit is rather stupid.

Have you actually ever read anything by Krugman? For years, he has served as one of the chief evangelists of free trade, which in case you hadn't noticed, is one of the underlying causes of the current economic crisis.

BTW, I am a progressive, not a neo-con.

Yeah, right.

Progressives don't smear Clinton and Krugman. That's what you neocons do.

"suggests that the Swedish Academy was maybe sending a message"

It's not the Swedish Academy that chooses the Economy Prize winner, it's the Swedish "Riksbank"; the "National Bank of Sweden" (somewhat like the Fed).