I am not sure if this rumor is true, but after R Wright introduced a money search paper, B Lucas asked, "Why?".
Famous economists' most biting put-downs
-
Back in '08 the sociologists and humanitards at Chicago threw a hissy fit when they found out the University was planning on creating the Milton Friedman Institute. After crying and losing hoap, they raged hard and put together a laughably pathetic protest letter, found here:
http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/friedman_letter.htm
In response, Cochrane wrote what is one of the best pieces of polemic I have ever read. He literally tears the humanitards a new arsehole. I would like to choose a single quote from it, but you really need to read it in its entirely to get the full effect of the absolution manhandling he gives the humanitards:
http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/friedman_letter_comments.htmNever saw the Cochrane letter before. That is pretty awesome stuff. Cochrane's take down of their use of the passive voice throughout their letter is hilarious:
"If you’re wondering “what’s their objection?”, “how does a MFI hurt them?” you now have the answer. Translated, “when we go to fashionable lefty cocktail parties in Venezuela, it’s embarrassing to admit who signs our paychecks.” Interestingly, the hundred people who signed this didn’t have the guts even to say “we,” referring to some nebulous “they” as the subject of the sentence. Let’s read this literally: “We don’t really mind at all if there’s a MFI on campus, but some of our other colleagues, who are too shy to sign this letter, find it all too embarrassing to admit where they work.” If this is the reason for organizing a big protest perhaps someone has too much time on their hands."
-
But honestly, do we really yearn to send a billion Chinese back to their “local economies,” trying to eke a meager living out of a quarter acre of rice paddy, under the iron grip of some local bureaucrat? I mean, the Mao caps and Che shirts are cool and all, but millions of people starved to death.
Cochrane STRONG
-
This paper is both original and insightful. However, the parts that are original are not insightful and the parts that are insightful are not original.
-Discussant at a finance conference.unfortunately this is self referential. a very old comment not original to a finance conference. and the stigler modest quote was said by churchill of attlee
-
"Suppose somebody sits down where you are sitting now and announces to me that he is Napoleon Bonaparte. The last thing I want to do with him is to get involved in a technical discussion of cavalry tactics at the Battle of Austerlitz. If I do that, I'm getting tacitly drawn into the game that he is Napoleon Bonaparte."
--Solow
-
When Friedman won the Nobel prize some other winners criticized his selection (for the whole Chile thing). Here is his reply.
http://0055d26.netsolhost.com/friedman/pdfs/nyt/NYT.05.22.1977.pdf
Some highlights
"You implicitly condemn the economic policies of Chile. Are you competent to do so?"
"Do you seriously suggest that we should not accept or teach students who come from countries that may have repressive regimes at some future date? Do you apply that political test to your students?"
"I said in Stockholm that 'the stench of Nazism is in the air.' I cannot believe that on reflection you will really want to add to that stench — as your letter so clearly does."
-
When Friedman won the Nobel prize some other winners criticized his selection (for the whole Chile thing). Here is his reply.
http://0055d26.netsolhost.com/friedman/pdfs/nyt/NYT.05.22.1977.pdf
Some highlights
"You implicitly condemn the economic policies of Chile. Are you competent to do so?"
"Do you seriously suggest that we should not accept or teach students who come from countries that may have repressive regimes at some future date? Do you apply that political test to your students?"
"I said in Stockholm that 'the stench of Nazism is in the air.' I cannot believe that on reflection you will really want to add to that stench � as your letter so clearly does."Friedman STRONG
-
"the Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess... This does not matter in the natural sciences. Here the influence exercised by an individual is chiefly an influence on his fellow experts; and they will soon cut him down to size if he exceeds his competence. But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally."
Hayek during his nobel speech. Love him or hate him you know that this is right and its the best criticism to the damage Krugman is currently perpetuating.
But we need to balance this out, so here is Friedman on Hayek: "[I am] an enormous admirer of Hayek, but not for his economics. I think Prices and Production is a very flawed book. I think his [Pure Theory of Capital] is unreadable."