Krugman was discussed at length in this weighty AF thread: http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?1,949269,page=1 While I myself have despised Krugman the political commentator for years (to the point of usually skipping over him), Krugman the Nobel-laureate economist stopped me in my tracks with this NYTimes piece, “How did Economists Get It So Wrong?”: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.html?em=&pagewanted=all It has all the argumentative qualities lacking in his politics (cool-headed, backed-up argumentation, objective, comparative treatment of opposing views). It illuminates the schools-of-thought presented in CFA Level I econ (haven’t gotten to Level II’s material yet) and couches it all in current events. Some of you should find it worthwhile too, so I thought it worth a post…
Thanks for the link. Very interesting article. Whether you sympathise with Krugman’s political views or not, there is no denying that he is a first-rate economist and excellent writer. Aside - Why is it that so many great economists (Keyne’s, Galbraith, Krugman etc) make great writers too? I think it shows that even though the field has become more and more quantitative in recent decades, at its core it is still a qualitiative discipline. Great thinker/philosopher/writers are much more likely to make great economists than are great mathematicians/scientists in my opinion and universities place too much emphasis on econometrics (aka quants in CFA land) rather than basic theory. If you look at Krugman’s early trade theory work, it is striking for the simplicity of the models used and the brilliant, ground-breaking analysis behind them. Sometimes less is more.