---T0Morrow@aol.com wrote:
[CUT - Krugman's controversial claims about "network
externalities]
> Query, though, whether Krugman knows much about
biology. I recall thinking that his criticisms of
bioeconomics were about half-right.
I recall this also ;)
> >Paul Krugman is a very good economist. Robin Hanson
Does "very good economist" mean he knows how to construct models? Krugman is certainly very good at being a controversial talking head... The following might be of interest (it's from the Hayek list) - Mark Crosby
"Friedrich Hayek and Joseph Schumpeter have many modern admirers .. But were they great economists? I don't think so. Hayek's stand against the political currents of his time took courage and has been partly vindicated by history. But if one asks what substantive contributions he made to our understanding of how the world works, one is left at something of a loss." Paul Krugman, _Slate_, Dec. 2, 1998
[CUT - huge number of quotes from distinguished economists citing Hayek's insights as essential to their own work.]
Krugman's Knowledge & Understanding of Hayek's Work, Nov. 9, 1998
I did have some conceptual bones to pick with [Krugman], and over the course of the afternoon he responded with good humor and even at times gave a little ground -- such as on his long-held opinion about the speed limits on economic growth. But on one point, he stone-walled. I objected to his having written that, before John Maynard Keynes came along, the world's understanding of recessions was "in a state of arrested development." Wasn't he familiar with the Austrian theory of business cycles, as set forth by Ludwig von Mises, Friederich Hayek .. ? He allowed that he wasn't, implying that such ideas were off his radar screen, since they couldn't be expressed mathematically."
Gene Epstein, "Not Just Academic: Economist Paul Krugman has won a broad audience; sometimes, he's even right". _Barron's_. Nov. 9, 1998.