(Yes, yes, I’m well aware that technically there is no nobel prize in economics.)
But besides that; who are the people who have the highest change of winning? Anyone up to date with like the favorites in economics?
Here is sort of a list: http://mostlyeconomics.wordpress.com/2010/09/05/nobel-prize-for-economics-2010-predictions/
Hopefully; it’s someone like Ostrom or Williamson and not a Kruggman. Ostrom is awesome - for an Austrian, as well as for libertarians.
Krugman has already won. So have Ostrom and Williamson.
P.S. What evidence suggests that Ostrom is Austrian?
Irrelevancy win.
“In a world of scarce resources waste should be regarded as immoral.” – Richard Posner
But that waste must be “efficient”, otherwise it wouldn’t exist. Or maybe immorality is more efficient than not wasting. Or maybe getting people to make quotes about the efficieny of waste is the most efficient of all. So what’s the efficient thing to do?
Whoever they pick will be a politically “safe” choice, not necessarily the person who has advanced economics the most. I think Robert Barro will probably win.
Whoever they pick will be a politically “safe” choice, not necessarily the person who has advanced economics the most. I think Robert Barro will probably win.
Ostrom is pretty libertarian, so I’m not sure how she’s the safest of all choices, and with Krugman shooting his mouth off on the internet and making himself look like an idiot, that was hardly a safe choice.
I’d be happy with that choice.
i hope it is alchian and/or demsetz.
i dont think the same after reading them.
i hope it is alchian and/or demsetz
I wouldn’t mind this at all, Tullock would also be a good pick.
All good choices.
I think Tullock gets my vote now (unless someone throws out a better pick).