It turns out that Greg Mankiw's punch out of Paul Krugman was just the start of a major tag team match. Bob Murphy comes in with a body slam charging Krugman with being a big bluffer. Murphy then tags Bryan Caplan, Scott Sumner and then David R. Henderson, who have a go at Krugman. Finally fans in the stands are throwing chairs at Krugman, i.e., Presto Pundit's posts in Murphy's comment section shouldn't be ignored, either.
I like the pro-Wrestling analogies, but I don't think Krugman cares a hoot what the economics blogosphere says. After all he has his Nobel prize and they do not. After all he has his NYT column and they do not. After all he rubs shoulders with the imperial purple and they do not.
ReplyDeleteKrugman is (and may have already fully completed) his smooth transition from the ranks of economists to the class of broad spectrum social-political pundit.
It doesn't matter if he never brings out an "economics" book ever again. He has arisen above all that. He is in the class that makes it's own reality now.
J.K. Galbraith made a similar ascension many decades ago. Galbraith's ascension was even more miraculous than Krugman's as J.K. carried the title of "economist" in the media and public life until his death, although it is hard to find any work by him that has all that much to do with actual economics. Pop sociology is about the best classification I can come up with.
At least Krugman did do some actual economics in his mortal phase.
I suspect, like J.K, P.K. will also float around for decades with the official title of "economist".
This is of course frustrating and irritating, but they aren't going to take back his Nobel prize. And the guy can write, even if his reasoning needs a little work.
So maybe we shouldn't worry about his "economist" moniker all that that much, after all Colonel Sanders and Colonel Tom Parker weren't actually Colonels either.