What is more a joke: Mo Farah's medals or Paul Krugman's Nobel Prize?

Your delusional belief that you know sh!t about economics

Semaphore Slim wrote:

Farah: weak era clown, mediocre at all distances

Krugman: thinks the economy would grow if you paid people to dig ditches and then fill them up again

you seem to be ignorant on all domains. Krugman is very well respected for his academic work, also by conservative economists. They don't award the Nobel for NYT blogs.

above_average_joe wrote:

Semaphore Slim wrote:

Farah: weak era clown, mediocre at all distances

Krugman: thinks the economy would grow if you paid people to dig ditches and then fill them up again

you seem to be ignorant on all domains. Krugman is very well respected for his academic work, also by conservative economists. They don't award the Nobel for NYT blogs.

Krugman is a nut job and laughed at by legitimate economists.

Ha

Ha

Name those legitimate economists please

Obama's or Arafat's peace prize would make for a better comparison.

Coach Bb wrote:

above_average_joe wrote:

you seem to be ignorant on all domains. Krugman is very well respected for his academic work, also by conservative economists. They don't award the Nobel for NYT blogs.

Krugman is a nut job and laughed at by legitimate economists.

your reading comprehension skills could be improved.

Daniel Lacalle, William Easton, michael porter, tim harford .. just to name a few.

Krugman is a quack and has been debunked by Peter Schiff countless times

The Nobel prize in economics is not a real Nobel prize.

Lacalle- mises, figures

Easton- name doesn't come up on google, do you mean William Easterly? If so, nothing there and both economists respect each other

Michael Porter - found nothing

Harford- found nothing

Would appreciate any links

Jamin has been promoting Peter Schiff's dire predictions of economic collapse and skyrocketing inflation/gold prices THIS YEAR for at least the last four years. It takes a special brand of sucker to keep citing him as a credible economist.

HardLoper wrote:

http://www.bizzyblog.com/wp-images/KrugmanHypocrisyOnDeficits0816and0117.jpg

Wow, the titles appear to contradict each other! Krugman is a fraud!

Wait, maybe we should actually read the articles, just to be sure. From the second:

"Now, government borrowing can still be justified if it serves an important purpose: Interest rates are still very low, and borrowing at those low rates to invest in much-needed infrastructure is still a very good idea, both because it would raise productivity and because it would provide a bit of insurance against future downturns. But while candidate Trump talked about increasing public investment, there's no sign at all that congressional Republicans are going to make such investment a priority. No, they're going to blow up the deficit mainly by cutting taxes on the wealthy. And that won't do anything significant to boost the economy or create jobs."

Oops!

Does anyone here that his nobel and professional competence are predicated on fields that he specializes in as an actual economist (international finance/macro, economic geography/trade), not debates with neanderthals who either have no background in economics or who have been obviously bought and paid for by special interest groups?

I do not pretend to understand the work that Krugman did to earn his Nobel, but I have read more than a few economists who disagree with his take accept that his specific work was very good. Regardless Nobel prizes are voted on by a committee.

PS: Krugman is a former Enron advisor.

I will go with Mo. Even if he is doping it is likely so is everyone else he is competing against, right?

Hank Kissinger wrote:

Nothing is more of a joke than Obama's Nobel Peace Prize.

I agree 100%! OBomber won because his father was a Kenyan.

He had done Nothing to deserve it! He Loved Killing People with Drones!!!

EpicQueen wrote:

I agree 100%! OBomber won because his father was a Kenyan.

He had done Nothing to deserve it! He Loved Killing People with Drones!!!

He won because the rest of the world was so relieved that the previous lying, warmongering, economy-destroying, torture regime had been replaced by a sane one.

The best part about Farah: We get to watch Rupp either dodge him in marathons from here on out, or get to see Farah run past Rupp late like always.

No definitely Krugman, Mo has 4 Olympic gold medals. There is actually no such thing as the Nobel prize in economics, it is a micky mouse award given by the Riksbank. I have known of Richard Thaler for many years, he is an interesting guy, but he actually hasn't added anything, he has just argued a perspective for many years. He won this year's award. Look at Myron Scholes and Robert Merton who won the award for their options models just at the same time those models began failing and almost bankrupted the world.

jamin_the_real_one wrote:

Lacalle- mises, figures

Easton- name doesn't come up on google, do you mean William Easterly? If so, nothing there and both economists respect each other

Michael Porter - found nothing

Harford- found nothing

Would appreciate any links

If you need help ID'ing Michael Porter in economics and business, you are too stupid to help.