>How about taking seriously someone who is, you know, well-known (to the point of receiving a Nobel Prize for his work) for being good at this economics stuff?

>How about taking seriously someone who is, you know, well-known (to the point of receiving a Nobel Prize for his work) for being good at this economics stuff? This is the type of claim that is fairly dangerous. It is perhaps vitally important to understand WHAT Krugman won the Nobel Prize for, and that was due to his contributions to New Trade Theory. Additionally, his work on NTT (superceded by NNTT I should add) was long, LONG ago, and he has since turned into a political pundit/shill. Compare it to his polar opposite, say, Hayek, who won it for his general contributions to the field due to libertarian/market anarchist theories. Yet Hayek is widely seen as a crock of shit while Krugman isn't, mostly because he writes for the NYT.