Andrew Leonard has a column “How the World Works” on Salon. I’m pretty sure in the past I have disagreed strongly with things he has written, but I have no complaints with his take on Paul Krugman’s recent article in the New York Times magazine. Leonard generally congratulates Krugman for his discussion of the big guns in mainstream economics (and I agree Krugman did a good job of that), but then Leonard says:
Note to some HTWW readers: In Krugman’s world, the profession is divided up mainly between the neoclassicals and the New Keynesians. There is not a whisper of the Austrian School. [Link in the original!--RPM]
(Thanks to Bob Roddis.)
UPDATE: I just dug up the article I had had in mind; I was really upset at something Andrew Leonard had written in the past. Believe it or not, Gene Callahan and I once co-authored a defense of Ron Paul fans for LRC. (Crazy, I know.) And that article contained one of my favorite zingers I’ve ever penned:
At this point we must warn our readers: As far as we can tell – and we’re experts at this, folks – in the above quotation Leonard has somehow contorted himself into using an incorrect stereotype as the basis for an invalid argument, where the conclusion applies to himself rather than his opponent. More succinctly, it is a hypocritical non sequitur anchored in a falsehood. Consequently, you may get lost in our delicate unraveling of the nonsense, but please keep in mind that Leonard left us no choice.
Ah, good times.
{ 8 comments }
I think Krugman is using the Chicago School as a straw man to attack liberty in that article. How he or anyone else imagines that increasing the power of government will lead to anything but another holocaust is beyond me.
You forget that Krugman styles himself as a liberal.
The monetarists are of course pseudo-keynesians themselves.
The interesting thing is that Keynes had a better understanding of money than Friedman had. At least he understood that money are not neutral. He was wrong on mostly everything else.
look here,
Krugman is very aware of the existence of the Austrian school, he actually studied the Hayek-v-Keynes debates… and he deliberately “ignores” them whenever he writes trash like this. Do not be fooled for one minute, he is a court economist and propagandist and cares nothing for science or truth… he does care, a lot, were his next paycheck/award/pat on the back from his masters is coming from…. He’s just a cheap Ellsworth Toohey/Hari Seldon wannabee.
Don’t waste your time with him, anymore than you waste it with Bernanke.
Interesting discussion of Krugman:
http://blog.vdare.com/archives/2009/09/07/how-krugman-got-it-wrong/#more-16271
Is this Andrew Leonard the guy between the homonymous YouTube channel? If so, cool.
Roy
Sadly I agree with you. I used to respect Nobel prizes but seeing the bs that passes for physics and astronomy today, and having read what P Krugman writes, it seems that the Nobel prize is not the worthy accolade it once was.
Thanks for commenting!
Comments on this entry are closed.