The Economy

[kandrathe]

So, in short, what's your point?

Well, as you alluded to before, it seems that to Krugman the "dismal science" is like eviscerating livestock to read the entrails. Again, Krugman says, "That house prices had risen too far was obvious, even if policymakers had seemed less sure. The surprise was that the bursting of the bubble would be so damaging. “I had no idea it would end so badly,” said Mr Krugman.

My point would be that either economics is useless, or at least Mr. Krugman seems to be as he appears to be like most so-called economists who excel in their ability to explain what has already gone wrong.

[Jester]

Well, as you alluded to before, it seems that to Krugman the "dismal science" is like eviscerating livestock to read the entrails. Again, Krugman says, "That house prices had risen too far was obvious, even if policymakers had seemed less sure. The surprise was that the bursting of the bubble would be so damaging. “I had no idea it would end so badly,” said Mr Krugman.

I think what he said was that macroeconomics has taken some wrong turns and ended up in a blind alley, not that the whole discipline is voodoo.

My point would be that either economics is useless, or at least Mr. Krugman seems to be as he appears to be like most so-called economists who excel in their ability to explain what has already gone wrong.

They aren't very effective fortune tellers, that's for sure. Anyone who invents a successful oracle for accurately predicting the behaviour of an ever-changing, nonlinear system of human agents responding to each other would, for obvious reasons, make a killing.

But you seem to be hanging Krugman in effigy for his profession, when not only was he far from the worst in this crisis (Hello Arthur Laffer...), he was among the best in that he was at least on the right track by late 2006, and able to acknowledge where he hit and where he missed.

-Jester