3 ms·
How does this have baring on this article? Are you just out to try and take down Krugman? Are you targeting Krugman because he works at NYT? Feels like a bit
by boringg 5y ago
How does this have baring on this article? Are you just out to try and take down Krugman? Are you targeting Krugman because he works at NYT? Feels like a bit of a hit from the right/libertarian wing here.
I will posit that almost every individual who makes future predictions on anything related to humanity is going to make some serious mistakes. That and our economy is beyond the capability for any people (or machines) on our planet to fully understand all the impacts maybe only the large flows. It's highly dynamic made up of many intelligent (and unintelligent) actors and national groups with sophisticated needs/wants.
Let's not try and take down economists for trying to help understand the economy when they clearly do understand it at a greater level then most people.
I also don't necessarily just put all my trust at the feet of any individual who says they know the future - thats a huge red flag.
- csdvrx 5y agoFrom a Bayesian perspective, someone who's been wrong again and again and again may eventually be right (like a broken clock being right once per day) but I'd say it's unlikely. You may consider that an ad-honimem attack, I see that as providing vital contextual information to help readers update their priors.
- boringg 5y agoIt is an ad-hominem attack and Krugman isn't even mentioned in the article. Clearly OP has an agenda and it is to target Krugman (and I see other people jumping on board). Disappointing thats all.