Krugman's prize
Russell Roberts

Everyone has their own least favorite Krugman quote. There was his disrespectful treatment of Milton Friedman after Friedman's death. There was his broken window analysis of the economics of 9-11. Today, now that he has won the Nobel Prize, I'd like to remember the quote that made it clear to me that the economic way of thinking was no longer of concern to him, when he wrote in the New York Times Sunday Magazine:

Although America has higher per capita income than other advanced countries, it turns out that that's mainly because our rich are much richer. And here's a radical thought: if the rich get more, that leaves less for everyone else. That statement -- which is simply a matter of arithmetic -- is guaranteed to bring accusations of ''class warfare.''

I've talked to a number of people who are depressed and angry at Krugman's prize.

For me, it is just another reminder that those of us who believe in liberty are in for a long time in the intellectual wilderness. Today's intellectual climate is a taste of what it must have been like to believe in liberty in 1933, or what it must have been like to be Milton Friedman in say, 1962.

I think things are much better today. We have many more outlets for spreading the virtues of freedom than we had in the past. I take solace in the fact that the average American today has a much richer understanding of the case for liberty today. And I take solace in what Milton Friedman said when I interviewed him in August of 2006 and commented on how topical Capitalism and Freedom still is. His response:

The basic principles that we believe in are going to stay the same for the next thousand years. That aspect of it will never go out of date. What goes out of date are the particular applications. We still find Adam Smith's book, Wealth of Nations well worth reading even though it's published in 1776.

So if you love liberty and fear those who would engineer our well-being rather than let it emerge from our free choices, if you love liberty and fear those who would use good intentions as an excuse for plunder, don't worry. We'll have our day down the road. Keep reading and writing and thinking. And don't yell. Above all, smile and hold firm to your principles. They will be remembered and valued when the pendulum swings the other way. It's just a matter of time.

Postscript (HT to Charlie and Sanjiv in the comments):

I'm not saying Krugman got the prize for his partisan advocacy. I have no idea. And I am not commenting on the quality of his academic work which I am not sufficiently familiar with to judge. What is unfortunate is that someone whose economic statements I mentioned above will be called a Nobel Laureate. And what is more unfortunate is that someone with his policy outlook (at least as it is articulated in his recent popular writing) which is hostile to liberty, will have a larger soapbox.

Krugman's prizeRussell Roberts

Everyone has their own least favorite Krugman quote. There was his disrespectful treatment of Milton Friedman after Friedman's death. There was his broken window analysis of the economics of 9-11. Today, now that he has won the Nobel Prize, I'd like to remember the quote that made it clear to me that the economic way of thinking was no longer of concern to him, when he wrote in the New York Times Sunday Magazine:
每个人都会不喜欢克鲁格曼的一些观点。这里是他在米尔顿弗里德曼去世时对其的不尊敬。这里是他关于911事件的破窗理论分析。现在，他得了诺贝尔奖，我记得当他在《纽约时报星期天杂志》上写下如下东西时，我确信经济学的思维方式不再与他有关：

Although America has higher per capita income than other advanced countries, it turns out that that's mainly because our rich are much richer. And here's a radical thought: if the rich get more, that leaves less for everyone else. That statement -- which is simply a matter of arithmetic -- is guaranteed to bring accusations of ''class warfare.''
尽管美国的人均收入比其它发达国家的高，那其实主要是因为我们的富人变得更富有了。有一种激进的观点：如果富人越来越多，留给其它人的财富就更少了。这用简单计算得出的看法定会带来关于“阶级斗争”的责难。

I've talked to a number of people who are depressed and angry at Krugman's prize.
我已经和一些对克鲁格曼得奖感到沮丧和气愤的人聊过了。

For me, it is just another reminder that those of us who believe in liberty are in for a long time in the intellectual wilderness. Today's intellectual climate is a taste of what it must have been like to believe in liberty in 1933, or what it must have been like to be Milton Friedman in say, 1962.
对我来说，他的得奖只不过是又一次提醒我们这些相信自由的人仍处在知识蛮荒的时代，并前已经很久很久了。今天的学术气氛就如同在1933年要相信自由一样，也如同弗里德曼在1962年说的一样。

I think things are much better today. We have many more outlets for spreading the virtues of freedom than we had in the past. I take solace in the fact that the average American today has a much richer understanding of the case for liberty today. And I take solace in what Milton Friedman said when I interviewed him in August of 2006 and commented on how topical Capitalism and Freedom still is. His response:
我觉得现在的情况要好得多了。我们比过去有了更多的渠道去宣扬自由的优点。事实上今天普通的美国人对自由有了更多的了解，这让我感到欣慰。我在2006年8月采访弗里德曼时他说的话同样让我感到欣慰。我说《资本主义与自由》的观点仍然反应着现实，他回答道：

The basic principles that we believe in are going to stay the same for the next thousand years. That aspect of it will never go out of date. What goes out of date are the particular applications. We still find Adam Smith's book, Wealth of Nations well worth reading even though it's published in 1776.
我们所相信的基本原理几千年也不会改变，它的样子将永不过时。过时的只是特定的应用。亚当斯密的《国富论》仍然值得认真阅读，尽管它是1776年出版的。

So if you love liberty and fear those who would engineer our well-being rather than let it emerge from our free choices, if you love liberty and fear those who would use good intentions as an excuse for plunder, don't worry. We'll have our day down the road. Keep reading and writing and thinking. And don't yell. Above all, smile and hold firm to your principles. They will be remembered and valued when the pendulum swings the other way. It's just a matter of time.
因此，如果你爱自由，并对那些宁愿设计操控我们的幸福也不让我们通过自由选择得到幸福的人感到恐惧；如果你爱自由，并对那些以好心作为掠夺借口的人感到恐惧，不用担心。属于我们的时代总会到来。请坚持阅读、写作、思考。不用喊叫，微笑并坚持自己的原则是我们的首选。当钟摆摆向另一边时，我们将看到我们坚持的价值，并被历史记住。这只是时间问题而已。