Topic: The Paul Krugman Effect (Read 235 times)

Fortunately enough, he already has near-zero reputation when it comes to anything technology-related due to his past statements concerning the internet.

Whatever Paul Kraugman said, his words were clearly wrong, and this is one of the reasons why many people were disappointed by his statements that did not happen or come true.

     Most likely, his reputation decreased and the number of people who believed in him before also decreased. No one really knows what will happen in the future.

In my opinion, the reason why they failed their predictions or innovative thinking is the same as why we consider them old fashioned. You are correct that just because they are successful in their areas of expertise does not mean they are experts on everything. New comers will eventually replace the old schools and history moves forward. All that matters is where we stand and how we react to all differences.

Let's distinguish macroeconomics from finance here. AFAIK, Krugman is one of the most popular macroeconomists around the world.
Bitcoin/crypto doesn't have any impact on macroeconomy, it has impact over the financial world-transactions, investing, portfolios, wealth storage, etc... Almost all macroeconomists around the world hate Bitcoin/altcoins. There must be a reason for that. Bitcoin/crypto cannot be used as a tool for imposing monetary policies. Bitcoin is designed to have no central authority that makes decisions about the future of the BTC blockchain. Macroeconomists love centralization and control, because having centralization is the only way to impose a certain macroeconomic policy upon the society.

The same reason why Buffett/Munger frequently craps on bitcoin/crypto — because mainstream media always ask them about bitcoin/crypto so MSM can have headlines that will be interesting for the masses.

Let's talk about the facts, and let's believe less what the mainstream media tries to impose all the time - which is that criminals use Bitcoin to hide their tracks, while on the other hand we know that it is much easier to track coins on the blockchain than cash. I'm not saying that the bad guys don't use Bitcoin, but in a global crime world that generates hundreds of billions in revenue, Bitcoin is harmless in the same way that it is harmless when it comes to the consumption of electricity it uses for mining and the impact on the environment.

Somewhat remember him, don't even recall he tweeted in 2018 (brave to do so in a bear perhaps but you know these guys these days).

Even somewhat surprised he hasn't gone even farther to either extremes (convert or bully).

Economist he may be, and he's certainly loads smarter than me, but I wonder if he's really kicking the can down the road with Bitcoin? I'd be retiring on my Nobel prize money.

Yeah they are completely blinded by the traditional methods of these finance and didn't find any other methods right in any manner.They have trust over governments and the monetary system as they think crypto as some sort of scam where no actual money is involved but they can't see it's actual use.I would say they have their own mentality but those who run behind them are persons making wrong move as there are many such economist who will support governments for whatever they do.

He can be a legend in his special field with which he was awarded the Nobel prize. However, he truly is not a legend in other fields like Bitcoin and cryptocurrency so his words in fields he is not familiar with are simply stupid words.

Funny for people who asked for his opinion when they already knew it does not belong to his special field. It's hilarious to see people believe in his tweets as well.

Bitcoin is a mean for such things I agree but it was not designed to do that. People who want to do those illegal or immoral activities surely try to find what they can use to do it. Bitcoin is one of their means to do it.

What makes him a legend? Was he right about the Internet or is it perhaps "legendarily stupid" to give such a man the Nobel Prize for economics? The fact is that he and people like him always stand firmly by the system, even when it seems that they are somehow opposing it. The only question is who recruited him and whose payroll he is on. Someone who receives a Nobel Prize does not necessarily have to be smart or a genius, because those who call themselves "flat earthers" also have as their leader a man who also won a Nobel Prize for something.

People who persistently advocate the idea that Bitcoin is a means to launder money, buy drugs, avoid paying taxes or even hire assassins will never be legends in my world. Neither do those who claim that firewood is "the next Bitcoin".

Paul Krugman is a legend.

I've followed Krugman for more than 10 years. He has many interesting things to say. (Although I don't know if many agree with him.) His stance and message has always been direct and consistent. Yet many appear not to know who he is. They don't know Krugman is one of the leading architects and founding fathers of modern monetary theory. As well as many modernist ideology concerning finance, economics and money.

The contrast between Milton Friedman and Paul Krugman is also an interesting one.

His economic takes outside of trade have been abysmal. He's called for more crypto regulation for the sake of protecting consumers from the predations of crypto because he's under the false impression that government acts more efficiently than the market can. Of course, he's rather silent about rapidly inflating fiat currency as a result of poor fiscal policy by the central banks.

Overly confident old people like Paul who dis new the technology just because old one does the trick are often ones who get left behind. But they sure want to look down on innovators.

But luckily future doesn't rely in the shoulders of old farts but newcomers with fresh ideas. And there has always been a gap with new innovators and old money / young trends and old people.

If i have learned one thing, that's not to overlook any innovation as pointless because the prototype isn't working as good as it should. Sometimes tech isn't ready for innovations but that changes quickly.

There are some fellow old people i know that seem out of touch in some things but are following the cutting edge of tech industry, their mind is open and wondering like a child's mind and that's a goal worth pursuing. I try to do that even if i am totally out of touch and can't comprehend tech. I am not going to push it down just because tech makes me uncomfortable.

But now i am generalizing. It's not only old farts who are against new tech, you can find plenty of close minded yöung people as well.

In history of humanity there has been people who have been deemed to be successful, intelligent and worth of studying, but in reality, that does not mean they are visionaries or can predict anything about the future. There are many examples of this, actually, this man was not the first one and won't be the last one.

One can be good at some field, like economics or science, but one also needs to be humble and learn how to say "I don't know" or "I am not sure" when there is not a clear idea about the evolution of the world.

Here I will let you know another example.


Source: Google Images.(https://thesalesopsguy.com/tag/digital-equipment-corporation/)

It's pretty much like Canadian protesters who thought the money was theirs until they got depraved of it.

Everything is fine up to a certain point.
Many Chinese citizens thought their daily routine is work, shopping, dinner with family and a movie in bed. Then they realized there will be no shopping and no dinner because the bank doesn't allow them to take money out and there are tanks protecting it so you can't even protest.

You're doing fine until some shit happens like your country goes to war and says that you either go to war too or to jail, so you have to run away, but there's a line to the ATM and withdrawal limits.

@mk4 did you observe that yourself? It's wonderfully hilarious, but frankly speaking most of us probably had comparable situations in their private environment or somewhere else when someone was bashing cryptocurrency due to ignorance or a lack of understanding and then unknowingly demonstrated that knowledge gap by criticizing something that Bitcoin would be the solution to. I just can't give a concrete example now, but I realized this is not the first time I come across something like this. But as I said, this one is really awesome exactly because it comes from a Nobel prize winner.

I have often been thinking about some joke articles and one that came to my mind was to approach a specialty market and suggest them to sell rat poison in a containment that loos like a physical Bitcoin on one side and the other side of the coin would be a cartoon of Warren Buffett. I guess if ever someone comes around and understands the joke because he or she is a Bitcoiner, they would probably buy it for the lols.

It is no problem when knowledgeable or even Nobel prize winners express skepticism, but what is hilarious about it is just how short-sighted and fluffy they talk about stuff while everyone would think they went for an intellectual deep dive before making weak statements.

Awesome you put this one together!

Just another of countless examples of how people very successful and educated on the old ways of finance are just too bought into the old system to see the revolution that bitcion is and the reasons why it is fantastic is necessary.


Also, the guy who tweeted that reply to him is amazing haha. Just destroyed him!

Wait till he finds out banks can also restrict him from making payments, with no reason given.

The significance of Bitcoin flew over the head of many who either did not understand it or did not want people to have the autonomy it comes with.
Paul Krugman is smarter than most, not enough reason to take investment advice from him. Learn to do your own research.

- Jay -

This guy has been giving series of bad advice. All his predictions fail, why do people still follow him? Is it some kind of blind loyalty to old school tradition? I wonder if he has changed his tune now. Warren Buffet seems to have similar thinking to Paul Krugman, he believes bitcoin is a scam and isn’t worth investing a penny in. True, he is a self made billionaire and a renowned for investment success, but that doesn’t make him an expert on all things.

He may probably be smart in some aspects of economics and markets, but he definitely has no business in trying to tell people what's great and what's not when talking about technological advancements lmao.