That said, I must point out that Krugman's emminence depends entirely on one's awe of the Nobel committee, where awe signifies nothing less than arrogation of one's own critical faculties to a bunch of people.

Most certainly Marx and Engles predicted "urbanization," the a result of mass confiscation of property, means of production actually owned and distributed as goods and services. The UK and US governments have been dedicated for some time to eliminating competition among property owners. Check out Einstein's political standing, in the time fold.

Most certainly Newton expressed gravity in mathematical language. He was also a religionist and alchemist embedded in the UK parliament. Your association of Krugman to that personage doesn't particularly validate Krugman's, shall we say, impariality to determine metrics of government functions.

I've no idea what Maxwell to which you refer. They all look dodgy, too, in terms of democratic and "scientific" rigor.

What I'm suggesting is that the Nobel committe selected Mr Krugman as an exceptional figure, as was the case with Gore, purely based on his media reach, circulation numbers. And that's pathetic.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.