Because Krugman is intellectually dishonest and because he's a public figure. His opinions shape the thoughts of the population. Nobody reads my opinions. Thank goodness I am no public figure.
If you're going to address the public, you should be honest. Krugman is an economist. He constantly sells half-baked, hand-waving arguments as absolute truths. And this is not because he's a "liberal". The same happens with all the "conservative" economists who also write dishonest articles.
Economics is hard. Very hard. An "expert" who tells the public he does not know will be frowned upon. But that's the point: experts don't know everything, and should not claim to know more than they do.
Greenspan himself wrote that when he ran the Fed sometimes they were completely "lost" and made decisions based more on gut-feeling than solid economic theory. Greenspan is pretty much retired now, so he can afford to be frank. Krugman still has a career, so he can't afford that.
Public figures are almost never intellectually honest, because in order to get to their position they usually have to align politically with either the Left or the Right. Facts and arguments are not methods for discovering truth but weapons for assaulting the other team.
At Hacker News we hold everyone to a higher standard. We are not trying to influence policy but to seek truth. We do not want the site to degenerate into the NYTimes or Wall St. journal editorial page.
An "expert" who tells the public he does not know will be frowned upon. But that's the point: experts don't know everything, and should not claim to know more than they do.
This is the tension in science. You take all of that schooling, and for what? To admit you're as stumped as everybody else?
I mean seriously, when is the last time you saw a science show where they basically said "Beats me"? Instead it's all upbeat and glossed over.
The way we sell science and actual state of science are two completely different things.
Science shows are entertainment, mostly. Their goal is to promote Science, and I think they do their job well.
I have had the priviledge of working with some truly top-notch scientists. A common trait among them is how honest they were on the limitations of their knowledge. They were not afraid to say they were wrong, or that they didn't know.
This was in their academic environment. I don't know if they would be that honest when addressing the public. The average person would probably not be able to understand how's it possible that an illustrious professor has spent his entire career studying elementary particles and is still baffled by them. That is due to the fact that the average person does not know what deep knowledge is, and does not need to know.
If you're going to address the public, you should be honest. Krugman is an economist. He constantly sells half-baked, hand-waving arguments as absolute truths. And this is not because he's a "liberal". The same happens with all the "conservative" economists who also write dishonest articles.
Economics is hard. Very hard. An "expert" who tells the public he does not know will be frowned upon. But that's the point: experts don't know everything, and should not claim to know more than they do.
Greenspan himself wrote that when he ran the Fed sometimes they were completely "lost" and made decisions based more on gut-feeling than solid economic theory. Greenspan is pretty much retired now, so he can afford to be frank. Krugman still has a career, so he can't afford that.