29 Apr 2014

Hayek > Krugman

Austrian School, Shameless Self-Promotion 3 Comments

I focused on Mises in my Mises Canada post, but I also should highlight this part:

Thus we see the where Finegold is coming from, when he claims that Krugman is clearly a better (or more important) economist than Rothbard, and that Krugman is indeed comparable to Mises and Hayek. It will be easier for me to tackle the latter claim first. Since it’s such a slam-dunk case, I’ll just focus on Mises, but I would personally put Hayek’s 1937and 1945 papers on knowledge as far more important than the entire body of work produced by Paul Krugman during his lifetime (thus far, since we don’t know what he’ll do tomorrow). And no, I don’t just mean, “I hate Krugman’s policy conclusions.” I am talking about contributions to economic science. I would much rather the people getting PhDs in economics this year read and absorb Hayek’s two papers, than understand how economies of scale can explain trade patterns.


3 Responses to “Hayek > Krugman”

  1. guest says:
  2. Bogart says:

    None of this matters. Check again in 25 years and see.

  3. andrew' says:

    It seems to me, the problem with Hayek is that economics hasn’t even caught up with him yet.

Leave a Reply