Hate to rain on the mirth, but Paul Krugman as an economist is an excellent economist. The problem is that he sold his soul to be a journalist for the NY Times. As a editorialist, he is a hack. As an economist, however, he is first rate.
Nonsense. His most idiotic screeds are related to how the birth of George W. Bush has resulted in a massive depression. If there is a bit of economic sense left in that carcass, the fanatical, Bush hating, emotion driven part keeps it well under wraps. Check out his take on the current troubles. All Bush and lack or regulation. Moronic ranting of a seventh grader, not a first rate economist.
So in which venue does he abandon his principles? His NYT columns are not worthy of such high regard in the academic community. He has to be shoveling it with both hands somewhere. Or is it that he is dumbing down to sell newspapers, trying to anyway.
Krugman - Economics
Chomsky - Linguistics
Both are out of their minds when it comes to politics.
I've read most of his assorted treatises, including the one the Nobel committee alleges is 'prizeworthy'. They are uniformly quasi-Marxist, and Krugboy is virtually the ultimate 'economist' advocate of state intervention in EVERY area of a nation's economy.
Who ya kiddin', Andy? Certainly not me, m'friend.