Empirical bases in economics = moving targets to make academic papers presentable. Krugman is wrong far more often than he's right. The irony of someone calling Krugman critics faith-based is something else.History shows literally the opposite. Today's conservatives are blinded by abstract principles with no empirical basis. Krugman may get some things wrong but he is right most of the time.
So, no credentials. Got it. Just lots of bluster.I love the obsession with "credentials"....as if Krugman and others who couldn't have been more wrong haven't made that laughable. I actually thought about getting a Ph.D. in economics when I was younger. But I realized they had an inferiority complex and tried to make it like branch of math or physics. Talk about square pegs and round holes.
So a pathetic sheep, unable to think for himself, blindly looking to follow the "credentialed." Typical.So, no credentials. Got it. Just lots of bluster.
Think of Paul Krugman like one would think of the winner of the 1980 Mr. Olympia contest.So, no credentials. Got it. Just lots of bluster.

Yeah, I get it. You read some slant pieces online and now you’re a clued-in rugged individualist. We’re all in awe.So a pathetic sheep, unable to think for himself, blindly looking to follow the "credentialed." Typical.
LMFAOHistory shows literally the opposite. Today's conservatives are blinded by abstract principles with no empirical basis. Krugman may get some things wrong but he is right most of the time.
LTCM was full of people with the credentials you so admire.So, no credentials. Got it. Just lots of bluster.
I read When Genius failed when it first came out. If I recall correctly, John Meriwether took larger risks, and had more faith in the models, than did the scholars who developed them and were on the board. Moral of the story? A little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands. Sound familiar?LTCM was full of people with the credentials you so admire.