Is PK saying that radical ideas about economic policy fall within the realm of sociology and politics, i.e., outside the field of "economic science," and therefore, in his quest of the ultimate prize for economic science, he can't afford to be distracted. Or is he saying simply saying that in pursuing radical ideas he would become politically black-balled from receiving the prize and he is too much of an opportunist to risk this? Or maybe both?
-----Original Message----- From: Ben Day [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 9:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [PEN-L:29707] Re: RE: PK endorses populism? At 08:45 AM 8/20/2002 -0700, Devine, James wrote: >Ben:>>[paraphrasing PK's possible thoughts] "If one follows this line of >thought one might well be led to some extremely radical ideas about >economic policy, ideas that are completely at odds with all current >orthodoxies. But I won't try to come to grips with such ideas in this >column. Frankly, I don't have the time. I have to get back to my research >- otherwise, somebody else might get that Nobel."<< J.D. - this was not a paraphrase, nor an attempt at humor on my part (god forbid) - these are Krugman's words from the article. Of course, they are an attempt at humor on his part, but one wishes in cases like this that he actually would draw out the policy implications. -----Ben
