Expert advice is hard for most people to evaluate. It often takes an expert, and so experts have a duty to explain the science, not lean on their credentials.
Not sure if you saw this little gem of larry's https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1475230229715161088?s=20 evidently there's no basis in economics for monopolies using supply bottlenecks to opportunistically price gauge and reap windfall profits using "inflation" as camouflage. Except that Isabella Weber just wrote a lovely piece in the guardian showing that there is a basis in history and in economics. It reminds me of a meme I saw once with a lady calling for a doctor because someone was having a heart attack, and a doctor of economics shows up and says "impossible, it wouldnt be in his rational self-interest"
I agree with you in principle but I think there's some important context and intent behind Krugman's use of the term "serious economists". I think it's important to make some kind of distinction between real experts in good standing within their field and others masquerading as experts while saying tax cuts always pay for themselves or we should return to the gold standard. I think that clarification is also useful when billionaire businessmen fancy themselves experts on the economy and start making misguided or misinformed claims to how it works. In my reading of Krugman, those people are most often his targets when he's highlighting the mainstream positions in economics. They truly are not serious economists. I think it's also a fair statement that the trump administration really didn't have any serious economists within it, especially toward the end.
I don't get the impression that there is a ton of daylight between you and Krugman there.
Using expertise to pull rank is obviously bad (and I've seen Krugman call others out on that before) . Bad-faith arguments that hold no basis in reality deserve to be called out and dismissed whether the subject is economics or epidemiology.
I totally disagree with you on Covid shutdowns. Viruses weaken over time. What worked the first year is not needed now. It is the responsibility of people at risk to isolate. Everyone else should follow precautions but we don’t have to go back to 2020.
Not sure if you saw this little gem of larry's https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1475230229715161088?s=20 evidently there's no basis in economics for monopolies using supply bottlenecks to opportunistically price gauge and reap windfall profits using "inflation" as camouflage. Except that Isabella Weber just wrote a lovely piece in the guardian showing that there is a basis in history and in economics. It reminds me of a meme I saw once with a lady calling for a doctor because someone was having a heart attack, and a doctor of economics shows up and says "impossible, it wouldnt be in his rational self-interest"
I agree with you in principle but I think there's some important context and intent behind Krugman's use of the term "serious economists". I think it's important to make some kind of distinction between real experts in good standing within their field and others masquerading as experts while saying tax cuts always pay for themselves or we should return to the gold standard. I think that clarification is also useful when billionaire businessmen fancy themselves experts on the economy and start making misguided or misinformed claims to how it works. In my reading of Krugman, those people are most often his targets when he's highlighting the mainstream positions in economics. They truly are not serious economists. I think it's also a fair statement that the trump administration really didn't have any serious economists within it, especially toward the end.
I don't get the impression that there is a ton of daylight between you and Krugman there.
Using expertise to pull rank is obviously bad (and I've seen Krugman call others out on that before) . Bad-faith arguments that hold no basis in reality deserve to be called out and dismissed whether the subject is economics or epidemiology.
I totally disagree with you on Covid shutdowns. Viruses weaken over time. What worked the first year is not needed now. It is the responsibility of people at risk to isolate. Everyone else should follow precautions but we don’t have to go back to 2020.