Lazy linking - catching up edition

A few things I've come across recently, which I thought might be of interest for others.

Paul Krugman explains how the legacy of Milton Friedman is getting eroded in today's GOP: Milton Friedman, Unperson

If you're on facebook, you've probably come across posts which claims that court rulings have shown that there is a link between autism and MMR vaccinations. As anyone with a minimum of science literacy knows, that's not the right venue for such things to be decided. Even so, Emily Willingham explains at greather length, why the claim is nonsense in Court Rulings Don't Confirm Autism-Vaccine Link

A chart telling the difference between extroverts and introverts, but with input from an extrovert.

I've always been a bit in awe over Randall Munroe's work ethics when it comes to his fantastic online comic xkcd, and my awe certainly didn't become lesser when I read this Wired article about his epic 3,099 panel comic.

Researcher David Kriesel has found problems with numbers being substituted when scanning on certain Xerox scanners. Xerox has looked into it, and have confirmed that there seems to be a problem - they are working on a software patch.

I expect that everybody, and their dog, have already seen this, but anyway: An Open Letter to David Cameron and the IOC

Via Jill - The Ghost Rapes of Bolivia (trigger warning: rape)

And finally: the most important map of Europe you'll see today!

How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?

This is a question that many people, economists included, have been asking themselves. Now, they can get the answer by reading Paul Krugman's long article on the very subject in the NY Times Magazine

>How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?

Readers of this blog are probably aware that I am a big fan of Paul Krugman, who I have found to not only be right more often than not, but to also be able to explain complex economical ideas in an accessible way - this article is no exception.

This article is well worth the read, even if you have little interest in the subject of economics (though given the times, I find it hard to believe that someone could be uninterested in that subject)

Obama vs Krugman

I'm not sure how much it is apparent to people who read my blog, but I used to study business management and economics before getting into programming and systems development. I suspect that's partly why I tend to end up working on financial projects. My background my explain why I am still fairly interested in economics, and follow it somewhat closely, and why I'm a big fan of Paul Krugman.

Newsweek has a good profile of Paul Krugman and his relation to the Obama administration.

Obama’s Nobel Headache

Paul Krugman has emerged as Obama's toughest liberal critic. He's deeply skeptical of the bank bailout and pessimistic about the economy. Why the establishment worries he may be right.

There is not doubt that Obama and Krugman is on the same side, and that Krugman wants Obama to succeed. Krugman doesn't, however, think that Obama is going to do so with his current politics, and he is not afraid to say so.

If I was Obama, or the people in his administration, I would listen very carefully to what Krugman says. Looking back through the Bush years, it's noteworthy how correct Krugman has been especially on issues related to economics. He has made mistakes, and been wrong of course (no one has a perfect track record), but on the big issues I can't think of any time he has been seriously wrong. In other words, his opinions are not things one should easily dismiss.

If you don't read Krugman's NY Times op-ed pieces, you should start doing so. And if you don't read his blog, you should do so as well.

Why economics is scary

In a recent NY Times column, Paul Krugman mentioned a paper that showed some parallels between the current US economic, and five major economic crisis in the past.

At his blog, he links to it (or rather, he links to a blog that links to it.

Is the 2007 U.S. Sub-Prime Financial Crisis So Different? An International Historical Comparison* (.pdf) by Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff

To sum it up, the current US situation shows many parallels to earlier financial crisis that caused year-long recessions in the countries in which they took place. It might be that the US escape this, but it will probably take hard work from the next US president to do so.

Edit: The Chronicle of Higher Education has more (via The Big Picture).

A look back in time; Ben Stein was also an idiot back then

PZ Myers links to a description of the newest stupidity of Ben Stein's economical advice. It's rather painful. However, even more interestingly, commenter JP points us to an old piece by Ben Stein where he accuses Paul Krugman of having a "limited background in economics".

Wow.

Paul Krugman is not one to mince words, so his response is quite entertaining.

Krugman speaks sense (again)

Paul Krugman is a reliable source for sensible commentary on both US politics and economics. His newest op-ed in NY Times is another example of that.

Fearing Fear Itself

Consider, for a moment, the implications of the fact that Rudy Giuliani is taking foreign policy advice from Norman Podhoretz, who wants us to start bombing Iran “as soon as it is logistically possible.”

Mr. Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary and a founding neoconservative, tells us that Iran is the “main center of the Islamofascist ideology against which we have been fighting since 9/11.” The Islamofascists, he tells us, are well on their way toward creating a world “shaped by their will and tailored to their wishes.” Indeed, “Already, some observers are warning that by the end of the 21st century the whole of Europe will be transformed into a place to which they give the name Eurabia.”

Do I have to point out that none of this makes a bit of sense?

For one thing, there isn’t actually any such thing as Islamofascism — it’s not an ideology; it’s a figment of the neocon imagination. The term came into vogue only because it was a way for Iraq hawks to gloss over the awkward transition from pursuing Osama bin Laden, who attacked America, to Saddam Hussein, who didn’t. And Iran had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11 — in fact, the Iranian regime was quite helpful to the United States when it went after Al Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan.

Beyond that, the claim that Iran is on the path to global domination is beyond ludicrous. Yes, the Iranian regime is a nasty piece of work in many ways, and it would be a bad thing if that regime acquired nuclear weapons. But let’s have some perspective, please: we’re talking about a country with roughly the G.D.P. of Connecticut, and a government whose military budget is roughly the same as Sweden’s.

Europe doesn't consider Iran a threat - maybe that should make the US stop up and think for a moment? Iran is after all much closer to Europe than to the US, and while Israel would be the closest target, Europe is certainly a much more likely target for Iranian nuclear weapons than the US, if nothing else, then because of geographic reasons (distance). Of course, other Middle Eastern countries are more likely targets for a Iranian attack, given the very real political and religious differences between Iran and a number of its neighbors.

Yes, Iran should be pressured to not get nuclear weapons, but that should be done through political paths, and based on a realistic evaluation of the threat they create, not through threats and ridiculous claims about the dangers Iran process.

Paul Krugman got a blog

Just noticed that Paul Krugman got a blog over at NY Times

The Conscience of a Liberal

I am a great fan of both his economical work and his opinion writing. His book, The great Unraveling, is a great read, even though it only contains reprints of his op-eds.