Quote:
Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute
Fair enough.
I was just under the assumption that science was supposed to be the primary reason for winning a Nobel Prize, rather than politics. Economics is a science with which I'm not very familiar, so perhaps he really is deserving of that prize.
I just like to taint things like that with my own view. It makes me feel better, ya know?
|
See, that's where you went wrong, thinking it was a science.
Krugman probaby benefited from the larger political landscape. No doubt the Swedes liked his politics. However, he didn't win for his recent work. He really doesn't do research anymore. He won for his work in the 80s. This isn't unusual. The prize in economics has always been given for work done 20-30 years ago. By that normal standard he holds up pretty well (his work on internationaal trade really was innovative). The most unusual thing is that he is a little young. Sure, there are some people I think are more deserving (I always want a financial economist to win (econometricians are okay too)) but I don't have a problem with the choice.