Règlement de compte chez les nouveaux keynésiens
Par Antoine B. le mercredi 25 mai 2005, 01:20 - Lien permanent
Trouvé sur “Outside the Beltway”, un extrait d’une interview parue dans Fortunes de Greg Mankiw, dans laquelle il se perd en amabilité sur son ancien prof Paul Krugman (lequel ne l’épargnait pas, dans le NY Times, quand il était conseillé économique de GW Bush) :
Q: So you often read the paper and slap your forehead?
A: Let me give you example. This is as I was arriving [as the new chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers]. Glenn Hubbard, my predecessor, was leaving. I read one of Paul Krugman's New York Times’ columns, and he said something like, "Hubbard said he was leaving to be with his family, but you could see the knives sticking out of his back." The suggestion was that he's being kicked out. I knew that wasn't true. I knew I got the job in large part because Glenn recommended me. So here we have Krugman sitting in some office in New Jersey making a supposition about what's going on in Washington and then writing for the New York Times, with readers presuming that he knew something.
Q: Krugman is a very respected economist. What are your thoughts on his transformation into a columnist?
A: I had Paul as a teacher at MIT. And when I was at CEA in '82 and '83, he was there as well. I was a junior staffer in the Reagan administration. Two members of the senior staff were Krugman and (former Harvard economics professor, Clinton Treasury Secretary and current Harvard president Lawrence) Summers. At that time he was a brilliant economist. I thought he'd win a Nobel prize. I think there's a good chance he still will. His early work on international trade theory deserves it.
Q: How do you explain what you describe as this change in Krugman?
It's strange what's happened since then. When he became a New York Times columnist, he decided to abandon writing about economics as an economist does. He's very liberal, which is fine—most of my friends at Harvard are liberal—but whenever someone disagrees with him, his first inclination is to think that person is either a liar or a fool. It's amazing to me that an academic would behave that way. The one thing that I value about academia is open-mindedness, the premise that all ideas and different points of view should be considered. No one has a monopoly on the truth. The one defining characteristic of a good professor is to be open to all viewpoints.


Commentaires
est ce que Krugman est vraiment un nouveau Keynésien? ce que j'ai pu lire sur ses "idées" macro ne va pas dans ce sens. En fait quand il parle d emacro sur son site tout ce qu'il dit me pariat très daté.
Sur son site, c'est bien souvent du basique hydraulique, c'est vrai.
Mais le reste c'est du nouveau keynésien. Ses modèles de commerce international présente tous les éléments allant dans ce sens.
Il y a une forme de ségrégation académique qui met la théorie du commerce à part, toute tendances confondues. C'est peut-être pour ça que Krugman n'est pas le premier cité dans la NEK.
Mais fais le point :
- approche micro des fondements macro
- concurrence imparfaite
- optima peu catholiques
Ca fait pas mal pencher la balance.
Du reste, je peux citer ce très efficace que sais-je que j'ai chroniqué jadis :
econo.free.fr/scripts/not...
Comme je le disais, ils mettaient les nouvelles théories du commerce international dans la mouvance. Et j'étais assez orienté classification académique dans mon appréciation de ce choix. En vieillissant, on est plus souple.
Euh... c'est contre-intuitif, non ? :o)