"Losing Our Country"--Part II

(To Idiots Like This)

Following up on my earlier mention of NY Times’ Paul Krugman’s recent op-ed column entitled ”Losing Our Country”, I am now prepared to offer some additional commentary and possibly explain why I have taken Mr. Krugman to task so often recently here in my blog.

This effort will take the form of two additional postings. This morning’s Part II will address Paul Krugman’s credentials and his fundamental qualifications to comment on domestic economic policy and economic conditions. Part III will offer a point by point rebuttal of Krugman’s logic (or lack thereof) and details (or lack thereof) in ”Losing Our Country.”

First I would like to give credit where credit is due.

Mr. Paul Krugman is, in theory, obviously a very smart man. You don’t simply sleep-walk your way through a BA at Yale and get handed a PHD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology without possessing a fairly high degree of mental capacity and some pretty good study skills.

My argument is not with Paul’s education or intelligence, but rather it is with his choice of topics relative to his knowledge base.

I say that Paul Krugman is what I call a bait-and-switch intellectual.

In support of this argument, here is an excerpt from his biography published on the NY Times online (bold emphasis mine—VRRIII):

“Mr. Krugman is the author or editor of 20 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His professional reputation rests largely on work in international trade and finance; he is one of the founders of the "new trade theory," a major rethinking of the theory of international trade. In recognition of that work, in 1991 the American Economic Association awarded him its John Bates Clark medal, a prize given every two years to "that economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge."

Mr. Krugman's current academic research is focused on economic and currency crises.

At the same time, Mr. Krugman has written extensively for a broader public audience.”

Do you see my point here?

No? Well let me explain…

In Mr. Krugman’s “writing extensively for a broader public audience,” I suggest that he is unfairly allowed to step out of his area of true expertise and into areas where, in my humble opinion, the only thing that he can add to the discussion is his own personal agenda and opinion—almost always politically motivated and thereby tainted—and/or a large dose of not always well intended hearsay.

This succinctly quantifies the problem which I have with all national newspapers, particularly the editorial departments—they are guilty of bait and switch editorializing.

The average NY Times reader doesn’t know anything about the writer other than a colloquial belief that “they must be really smart” and that “they must have something important to say,” else the newspaper’s editors wouldn’t let them write in such a high profile position. The NY Times is a master of this illusion.

And what is the Editors’ answer? I suspect that it would be “but we said that it was an opinion…”

What complete and total crappola. They can’t have it both ways intellectually.

To hide the factual inaccuracies, half truths, or outright lies and misrepresentations contained in Krugman’s and his cohorts writings behind the page title of “Editorial” or “Opinion” is still unethical in my opinion because Krugman is generically represented as a PHD economist.

But I remind you that Krugman is a recognized expert on International Trade and Finance, not domestic issues. His bio lets that cat out of the bag, but how many readers bother to look into the details like I have here?

For example, I consider myself to be a bit of a meteorological aficionado, but the Weather Channel should never hire me, a mechanical engineer and aspiring writer, to fill in this week reading the satellite charts and doing hurricane forecasting which the lives of hundreds if not thousands of people and millions of dollars of property depend on to protect.

So why then should Paul Krugman, an expert on International Trade and Finance, be allowed to try to tell me why my country is going down the toilet and the middle class has disappeared?

Just wondering…