3 ms·

Krugman was very influential in the development of a theory of international trade not involving perfect competition. Whatever you think about economics in gene

by rms 17y ago

Krugman was very influential in the development of a theory of international trade not involving perfect competition. Whatever you think about economics in general, it seems to be a pretty clear step towards more closely modeling reality.

nazgulnarsil 17y ago
the problem is that it is impossible to audit said models. unlike real science the social sciences can't isolate variables in order to test predictive power.
- berntb 17y ago
  Like e.g. palaeontology, economists can't do experiments. You must remember that about economy. I've read a bit too much criticism of economy as a science using the same argument you see from creationists against palaeontology. (That is, assumptions that all researchers are idiots and/or in a conspiracy against the creationists/left wing extremists.)
  - nazgulnarsil 17y ago
    well pure paleontology is abduction is a sense. but the thing about paleontology is that it is based on biology in which we can do experiments.
    - berntb 17y ago
      Economy is arguably based on cognitive psychology and game theory. (A bit less strictly, but it should even out with all the lacking environmental parameters in paleontology...)
bokonist 17y ago
Can you name anything that Krugman said that was both a) novel and b) true? Can anyone? Did he really say anything about trade that wasn't known to Alexander Hamiliton? Did he say it in a way that wasn't already said more eloquently by Jane Jacobs? Sure he added a lot of mathematics, but the Wikipedia article is pretty damning on that front: "The econometric evidence for NTT was mixed, and again, highly technical. Due to the time-scales required and the particular nature of production in each 'monopolizable' sector, statistical judgements have been hard to make. In many ways, there is too limited a dataset to produce a reliable test of the hypothesis which doesn't require arbitrary judgements from the researchers." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trade_Theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trade_Theory In other words, Krugman's contribution is a lot of math that has never been shown to work. When you add math to a theory in a way that does not improve people's understandings of the issue, you have not added to the world's store of knowledge.

by rms 17y ago

nazgulnarsil 17y ago

the problem is that it is impossible to audit said models. unlike real science the social sciences can't isolate variables in order to test predictive power.

berntb 17y ago
Like e.g. palaeontology, economists can't do experiments. You must remember that about economy. I've read a bit too much criticism of economy as a science using the same argument you see from creationists against palaeontology. (That is, assumptions that all researchers are idiots and/or in a conspiracy against the creationists/left wing extremists.)
- nazgulnarsil 17y ago
  well pure paleontology is abduction is a sense. but the thing about paleontology is that it is based on biology in which we can do experiments.
  - berntb 17y ago
    Economy is arguably based on cognitive psychology and game theory. (A bit less strictly, but it should even out with all the lacking environmental parameters in paleontology...)

bokonist 17y ago

Can you name anything that Krugman said that was both a) novel and b) true? Can anyone? Did he really say anything about trade that wasn't known to Alexander Hamiliton? Did he say it in a way that wasn't already said more eloquently by Jane Jacobs? Sure he added a lot of mathematics, but the Wikipedia article is pretty damning on that front: "The econometric evidence for NTT was mixed, and again, highly technical. Due to the time-scales required and the particular nature of production in each 'monopolizable' sector, statistical judgements have been hard to make. In many ways, there is too limited a dataset to produce a reliable test of the hypothesis which doesn't require arbitrary judgements from the researchers." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trade_Theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trade_Theory In other words, Krugman's contribution is a lot of math that has never been shown to work. When you add math to a theory in a way that does not improve people's understandings of the issue, you have not added to the world's store of knowledge.