Paul Krugman attacked professional macroeconomists (previously). John Cochrane, an economist at the University of Chicago, returns the favor, arguing that Krugman deeply misrepresents current economic ideas because he's abandoned economics as a "quest for understanding" in favor of trying to be the "Rush Limbaugh of the Left."
posted by shivohum on Sep 28, 2009 - 77 comments

The president of a Savings & Loan sent the following email to his family: If you have one hour of your time to invest in learning more about the current economic crisis, I highly recommend you click on one of the two below links and view [Paul Krugman's Friday address to the National Press Club]. His remarks take about 1/2 hour followed by 25 minutes of Q&As. I believe you will find watching it worth your time. P.S. If you decide to view Krugman's speech, I recommend you view it "full screen" for the best effect of viewing his body language. Link 1, Link 2 [more inside]
posted by spock on Dec 21, 2008 - 63 comments

Friedman under attack More than 100 faculty at the University of Chicago, where Milton Friedman won the 1976 Nobel Prize in economics, are trying to stop the university from putting Mr. Friedman's name on a $200-million (U.S.) research centre. The opponents argue that the Milton Friedman Institute would compromise the academic integrity of the university and serve as a monument to Mr. Friedman's world outlook, which they say has largely been discredited. [more inside]
posted by KokuRyu on Oct 21, 2008 - 31 comments

"...For his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity," the 2008 Nobel Prize in economics has been awarded to New York Times columnist Paul Krugman.
posted by XQUZYPHYR on Oct 13, 2008 - 94 comments

Where no economist had gone before . Paul Krugman posts a type-written paper on interstellar trade which he wrote as "an oppressed assistant professor" in the '70s. I do not propose to develop a theory which is universally valid, but it may at least have some galactic relevance. [pdf link]
posted by grobstein on Mar 11, 2008 - 25 comments

Getting rich by getting it wrong How the elite pundits who pushed the war profited in money and prominence, despite being completely wrong. Mean while many pundits who opposed the war from the start were sidelined.
posted by delmoi on Jan 12, 2007 - 37 comments

NY Times will be going pay-only for access to columns by Paul Krugman, Thomas Friedman, and Maureen Dowd. On the 19th of Sept! And I assume the others like Herbert and Frank will drop behind the iron curtain as well. These are obviously some of the most blogged about and emailed content on the NYT site. Do you think it will be worth $49.95 year (it does come with 100 archive articles, which is admittedly pretty sweet)? Do you think that bloggers will stop linking to those columnists? Is this the end of free?
posted by zpousman on Sep 13, 2005 - 85 comments

Paul Krugman and Daniel Okrent get into a pissing match. In his final column as New York Times ombudsman, Okrent stated that Krugman, the New York Times columnist, "has the disturbing habit of shaping, slicing and selectively citing numbers in a fashion that pleases his acolytes but leaves him open to substantive assaults." The paper gave the two of them some webspace to discuss the matter. The result is catty and entertaining, but the tone is certainly more vicious than I'd expected. They really don't seem to like each other very much.
posted by Tin Man on May 31, 2005 - 70 comments

Haaretz Daily: "This isn't America; the government did not invent intelligence material nor exaggerate the description of the threat to justify their attack." Krugman: So even in Israel, George Bush's America has become a byword for deception and abuse of power. And the administration's reaction to Richard Clarke's "Against All Enemies" provides more evidence of something rotten in the state of our government.
posted by skallas on Mar 31, 2004 - 13 comments

Paul Krugman gives some free advice to reporters covering the election.
posted by skallas on Dec 25, 2003 - 39 comments

It seems slightly scandalous that Krugman has persisted in noting that the present administration has been moving the lion's share of the money to an array of corporate interests distinguished by the greed of their CEOs, an indifference toward their workers, and boardroom conviction that it is the welfare state that is ruining the country. Krugman has been strident. He has been shrill. He has lowered the dignity of the commentariat. How refreshing. Russell Baker reviews Paul Krugman's The Great Unraveling: Losing Our Way in the New Century. We have now reached a point when even the White House may be forced to sort out how a president who got elected to execute a straightforward business agenda managed to sandbag himself with the coinciding fantasies of the ideologues in the Christian fundamentalist ministries and those in his own administration.... Joan Didion reviews Armageddon: The Cosmic Battle of the Ages by Tim F. LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins. The New York Review of Books 40th anniversary edition is an especially good read..
posted by y2karl on Oct 28, 2003 - 10 comments

Video of Krugman on Media and Economics

If Bush said the earth is flat, of course Fox News would say "Yes, the earth is flat, and anyone who says different is unpatriotic." And mainstream media would have stories with the headline: "Shape of Earth: Views Differ; and would at most report that some Democrats say that it's round."

So said Paul Krugman during a recent interview in Boston with Chris Lydon, former host of NPR's 'The Connection.'
posted by ericrolph on Sep 22, 2003 - 28 comments

The President "has more familiarity with troubled energy companies and accounting irregularities than probably any previous chief executive." (NYTimes link, reg req'd) Krugman chimes in on Whitehouse outrage to corporate fraud. (See also, Cheney's investigation regarding Halliburton's accounting while he was it's big cheese)
posted by BentPenguin on Jul 2, 2002 - 12 comments

America the Polarized NYT's Paul Krugman says that Congress is polarized because Republicans have moved to the right, while Democrats have remained fairly constant. He (and a political scientist) attribute the change to economic polarization, the sharply widening inequality of income and wealth.
posted by pmurray63 on Jan 6, 2002 - 24 comments

That didn't take long. Thanks to Paul Krugman; it's high time someone disagreed with Bush's wrongheaded fiscal ideas. Bush is going back to fuzzy math to justify another tax cut.
posted by Yelling At Nothing on Oct 7, 2001 - 8 comments