Isn’t it time for a Paul Krugman Hall of Shame?

Liberals love Paul Krugman, the unapologetically progressive economist and New York Times columnist who never met a tax hike or Keynesian government spending program that he didn’t like.  He is lionized by progressives as the go-to authority on all matters of economic policy, and his Nobel Prize is routinely shoved in the faces of dissenters as the ultimate “shut up”.

But in reality, Krugman is often very, very wrong.  Hilariously wrong.  Wrong to the point of mockery.

I think it’s time to start an official Paul Krugman Hall of Shame, something that we can all bookmark for our own amusement.  I’ll start it with three notable Krugman observations:

The growth of the Internet will slow drastically, as the flaw in “Metcalfe’s law”–which states that the number of potential connections in a network is proportional to the square of the number of participants–becomes apparent: most people have nothing to say to each other! By 2005 or so, it will become clear that the Internet’s impact on the economy has been no greater than the fax machine’s.


What Mr. Romney and everyone else should know is that the Veterans Health Administration is a huge policy success story, which offers important lessons for future health reform.


If you think you’ve found an obvious hole, empirical or logical, in Piketty, you’re very probably wrong. He’s done his homework!


Commenters, feel free to submit your own Krugman quotes …

Santa Barbara Killing Can Be Blamed in Part on Corrupt College Culture
Another liberal house of cards on the verge of collapse
  • Retired military

    Now now Krugman is a prize winning author. Sorta like Obama is a Nobel peace prize winning president. it is sorta like the same thing.
    Krugman wrote crap to win his.
    Obama did crap to win his.

  • jim_m

    Krugman is carrying on the great tradition of the NYT following in the footsteps of their most celebrated writers like Walter Duranty. Covering up for despotism, oppression and mass murder is the stock and trade of the NYT, its columnists and editorial board.

  • Brucehenry

    Warner didn’t finish reading his own Marginal Revolution link. Its author concludes about Krugman’s predictions “That’s a mixed record, as anyone would have, but more insightful I think than the critics are granting.”

    Krugman cranks out columns several times a week and has been for years. He’s certainly wrong no more often than Warner, who has been crying wolf for at least 6 years about tyranny, gun confiscation, Stalinism in America yada yada.

    And as I point out in the other thread, Piketty — and by extension Krugman in Piketty’s defense — isn’t nearly as “debunked” as Warner would like us to believe. When it is an undeniable fact, as Krugman points out, that of the top 10 wealthiest American 6 are either Waltons or Kochs, it’s hard to argue that wealth is NOT being concentrated more and more into fewer and fewer hands.

    • jim_m

      Nice. I’ll remember that: Bruce claims that Krugman more or less as accurate as Warner.

    • Retired military

      I am curious why you didn’t mention Soros or Gates. If fact at least 2 of the richest have to do directly with the IT field. 4 of them are retail.
      then you have Bloomberg.
      I don’t know the politics of the waltons but I do know that dems are well represented in the top 10 and occupy at least the top 2 slots. in fact Gates who is number 1 is listed as having the same amount of money as both Koch brothers combined.

      • Brucehenry

        Soros is not in the top 10. Gates and Buffett will have given away most of their wealth by the time they die. The Waltons, on the other hand, continue to accumulate more and more.

        4 of the top 10 are descendants of a guy who started and built a very successful business. They’ve done nothing on their own to account for the “success” they enjoy. Inherited it all. Unlike Gates, Buffett, or Ellison.

        • Rick Caird

          Look at Hilton and Woolworth. Those fortunes are dissipated in 3 generation. If Gates and Buffet give away their fortunes that is their choice not government’s. But, the government does not get the tax revenue.

          So, they set up a foundation to avoid taxes.

        • jim_m

          LOL. If you think that Gates and Buffett will have given away their wealth by the time they die you are a bigger fool than I thought. Sure they may have created a foundation and poured the monies into those, but that money won’t have been given away. Not by a long shot.

        • I down ding this comment as well.

        • Retired military

          I mixed up Soros and Buffet sorry. Also most of Gates and Buffet money will go into the “charitable” foundation which will be run by their heirs so that their heirs wont have to pay taxes on it.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      What does “Warner” have to do with this post? Warner didn’t author this post or the previous post re: the debunking of Piketty, either. I’m late to the thread [yard work, grandsons, cooking, etc.] so if I missed something, mea culpa. If not, I’ll leave it to Jim M to crack on your reading ability.

      • Brucehenry

        LOL no you missed nothing, I did. I got so used to Warner authoring 100% of the articles here I didn’t notice the byline. Still, Michael didn’t finish reading his own link.

      • No shaming the shameless progtards…

      • Brucehenry

        I’m glad to see, by the way, that Michael has seen fit to return and help Warner carry the load around here. Perhaps M. Soi Disant could be prevailed upon to contribute another cut-and-paste job, as he does every 6 to 9 months or so, instead of derpy potshots consisting of repeated meaningless syllables like “hemorrhoid” and “down ding.”

        • A down ding is all a brucehemorrhoid gets, and more than it deserves.

          • Brucehenry

            As you wish.

          • I down ding brucehemorrhoid and encourage him to comment here no more forever.

    • I down ding brucehemorrhoid.

  • alanstorm

    “Isn’t it time for a Paul Krugman Hall of Shame?”

    Well, sure. But who’s going to pay for all the acreage required?