Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Mad dance on Krugman’s Nobel Prize

Is it their time to dance on Nobel fraud? Of course may be in political and ideological mode but not intellectual mode. I have nothing to do with Krugman Nobel Prize winnings but feel strongly how governments support feed people in the world?

Read more here

Let’s see few people’s comments on his prize.

The Economic Times editorial says that “A glance at the Nobel prize winners in economics since 1980 shows that with the exception of Joseph Stiglitz and, of course, Amartya Sen, there is hardly any name that is likely to ring a bell even with a relatively informed audience in India. 

Part of the reason, of course, is that the awards are given for esoteric work that few understand. But the major reason is that none of the awardees were able to connect with the average public; and on concerns they relate to, a prime example being the on-going financial crisis”. But “it is doubtful his name would have rung a bell beyond the narrow circle of economists”.

Second Mr Niranjan Rajadhyaksha says in Mint that “It is tempting to see the clear failure of global financial markets to do their main job—efficiently transferring money from risk-averse savers to risk-taking entrepreneurs—as a failure of the market economy. It could just be a hop, skip and jump from here to a more general rolling back of economic reforms”. It is uttered vague that as an honest observer of any particular economy or sector should say who is responsible.

He also conclude that “Krugman made a case for rethinking the way the world economy is run, much like his intellectual hero John Maynard Keynes did in 1930”. Not so, read here an excellent narrative.

Saubhik Chakrabarti says that “Parenthetically, let’s hope that the Nobel to Krugman for his trade theory, which is recognised by his peers as absolutely first class, doesn’t rule out for ever, given the prize committee’s alleged quota system, recognition for the other great trade theorist of our time, Jagdish Bhagwati. There’s something different about Krugman, though, different from Sen, Stiglitz, Friedman, Bhagwati. And it’s a disturbing difference”.

Not surprisingly he says you “Read Krugman and you get the sense that he will sacrifice almost anything, logic included”.

Business Standard editorial says “f writing newspaper columns merited Nobel prizes, Indians would have many more of them”.

The financial express column Dhiraj Nayyar says “Not surprisingly this group has cornered a comfortable majority of Nobel Prizes over the last three decades” and “Paul Krugman won the 2008 Nobel Prize primarily for his work on new trade theory. The new theory modified the old trade theories by relaxing the assumption of constant returns to scale in production (in a perfect market) and incorporating the idea of the existence of increasing returns to scale (in an imperfectly competitive market). New trade theory backed by the rigour of mathematical modeling laid a new foundation for the possibility of government intervention in trade—if economies of scale exist it would be impossible for a newcomer to challenge an existing firm without subsidy or government protection”.

But there is anomaly in sayings new comers will be impossible to enter suppose the new comer has advanced technology to cope up?

No comments: