Like any sane person we here at Independent Sources enjoy picking apart the columns of Paul Krugman, but pleasurable activities can be pursued to the point of obsession. I have to wonder if that isn’t the case with this article by Daniel B. Klein with Harika Anna Barlett in the current Econ Journal Watch in which they have read, categorized and critiqued all 654 articles that Krugman published in the NY Times between 1997 and 2006. I mean come on funs fun but this had to be like masturbating with a handful of broken glass.

Harika Barlett and I have made a complete review of Krugman’s New York Times columns 1997 through 2006—in all, 654 columns. Here I interpret his ideological sensibilities. I think they are quite wrongheaded, but that claim is not something I attempt to defend. I do not dispute isolated statements. My critique assesses the 654 NYT columns as a whole. I argue that the pattern of policy positions and arguments do not square with his purported concern for general prosperity and the interests of the poor. There are contradictions between what Krugman makes himself out to be and certain patterns of his policy statements. Some of the evidence lies in statements made. But the more important evidence lies in patterns of statements not made. Because Krugman assumes the role of addressing the most important things, because Barlett and I have made a complete survey of his NYT columns 1997 through 2006, and because the omissions are flagrant, I may treat omissions as evidence of Krugman’s ideological character and sensibilities.

Krugman is best interpreted as a committed social democrat and Democratic partisan. My main contention is that his social-democratic impetus sometimes trumps people’s interests, notably poor people’s interests. The tension surfaces in what Krugman has written about immigration and the threat it is poses to the US welfare state. But the tension is found in his writings on several topics, and, importantly, in omissions in his writings. Krugman has almost never come out against extant government interventions, even ones that expert economists
seem to agree are bad, and especially so for the poor.

Klein goes on to advance the argument that rather than truly being interested in the well being of the poor Krugman is actually more interested in the advancement of his parties interests in almost every facet of life. I think we all knew that but sometimes it helps to restate the obvious.

I haven’t completed reading the 45 page appendix that accompanies the 25 page article but the 10 pages I have read are not any more complimentary to Krugman than the two paragraphs I quoted above. Personally my favorite part so far is where Krugman argues both for and against a minimum wage hike on the basis that it will help the poor.

In closing the article is an interesting read but Klein even though Klein’s nascent Ron Paul love shows through and that caused me a bit of a problem. Barlett I am reserving judgment on, Klein admits that she is an innocent graduate student that he roped into doing the leg work so he could write his article. She may be a rational human being and not a fellow traveler in the REVOLution baby.

h/t Instapundit

Paul Krugman, Economics

This entry was posted on Monday, January 28th, 2008 at 7:26 am by Chad and is filed under Big Thoughts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.