Paul Krugman, a Princeton University prof with a column in The New York Times, won the Nobel prize in economics today.
While I can’t honestly say I’ve read his “analysis of how economies of scale can affect trade patterns and the location of economic activity,” which is what the prize committee says won the prize for him, I really have to wonder about this one.
Based on his columns, I have to wonder how much evidence went into the research. His columns are mostly based on your belief that he’s a brilliant economist, not on any evidence he presents. And, despite the prize committee calling him an “opinion maker,” his opinions are rarely very interesting. They usually sound like slightly intellectualized Democratic Party rhetoric.
Asked about Krugman’s political leanings, Tore Ellingsen, a member of the prize committee, told The Associated Press: “We disregard everything except for the scientific merits.”
Gotta wonder about that.
To test that, some bold economist should lay out the economic case against following Al Gore’s advice on climate change, pointing out that you’d kill more people by taking extreme measures to reduce global warming than will the warming itself.
If that work wins a Nobel prize, I’ll believe in the committee’s objectivity.