楼主: 老鱼父
17449 68

[推荐]王则柯: 读克鲁格曼,学经济学方法 [推广有奖]

11
kasn2 发表于 2008-10-12 20:19:00

做学术的人要坐得冷板凳~

克鲁格曼终于还是有所成的

每一个经济学家的理论都经历着被质询或者被改进甚至被推翻的过程,毕竟相对于比较完善的哲学体系,经济是一个很古老的话题,经济学却刚开始不久

世界经济形势呈现复杂化、高速变化的特点,使经济规律的抽象更加艰难,所以更多的人走向了数学验证、计量的方面,相对于建立一个东西,破坏一个东西找出漏洞或者验证一个东西会容易许多

不可能希望他所有的东西都是对的,但是至少他的学术精神是值得学习的!


hfei1218  金钱 +50  奖励 2009-3-28 15:27:38

12
老鱼父 发表于 2008-10-14 00:08:00

Paul Krugman 获得诺贝尔经济学奖

Press Release

13 October 2008

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences has decided to award The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 2008 to

Paul Krugman
Princeton University, NJ, USA

"for his analysis of trade patterns and location of economic activity"


International Trade and Economic Geography

Patterns of trade and location have always been key issues in the economic debate. What are the effects of free trade and globalization? What are the driving forces behind worldwide urbanization? Paul Krugman has formulated a new theory to answer these questions. He has thereby integrated the previously disparate research fields of international trade and economic geography.

Krugman's approach is based on the premise that many goods and services can be produced more cheaply in long series, a concept generally known as economies of scale. Meanwhile, consumers demand a varied supply of goods. As a result, small-scale production for a local market is replaced by large-scale production for the world market, where firms with similar products compete with one another.

Traditional trade theory assumes that countries are different and explains why some countries export agricultural products whereas others export industrial goods. The new theory clarifies why worldwide trade is in fact dominated by countries which not only have similar conditions, but also trade in similar products – for instance, a country such as Sweden that both exports and imports cars. This kind of trade enables specialization and large-scale production, which result in lower prices and a greater diversity of commodities.

Economies of scale combined with reduced transport costs also help to explain why an increasingly larger share of the world population lives in cities and why similar economic activities are concentrated in the same locations. Lower transport costs can trigger a self-reinforcing process whereby a growing metropolitan population gives rise to increased large-scale production, higher real wages and a more diversified supply of goods. This, in turn, stimulates further migration to cities. Krugman's theories have shown that the outcome of these processes can well be that regions become divided into a high-technology urbanized core and a less developed "periphery".



Read more about this year's prize

Information for the Public (pdf)
Scientific Background (pdf)
In order to read the text you need Acrobat Reader.

沧浪之水清兮可以濯我缨,沧浪之水浊兮可以濯我足。

13
老鱼父 发表于 2008-10-14 00:23:00

保罗.克鲁格曼:金融危机中的两类问题

有人问我,为什么不写一些诸如如何救济购房者之类,有独特观点的的文章。也许我应该多写一点;然而在此之前我要先说一下目前经济中存在的两类问题。

如何维持金融系统的运行是最迫切需要解决的问题之一。如果我们希望避免类似于1931年的经济大崩溃,就必须严控这个问题。而解决诸如如何救济购房者之类的问题,显然无法有效缓解银行的资本危机,也不能立即解除目前的燃眉之急。所以短期内解除金融危机的手段主要集中在注入资本和保证流动性上。

现在我们知道经济已经陷入了衰退;即使汹涌而来的金融危机得到了控制,衰退也将延续。我们必须在很多方面有所行动:财政刺激,中央与当地政府的援助,对购房者的救济等等。

两类问题的解决都很重要,我们同时应该清醒的意识到,解决其中一个问题并不能自动地把另外一个问题解决掉。实际上,可能直到下届总统离任,长期手段也不一定能够有效发挥作用。而另一方面,迫切需要解决的短期问题则最好在近些天就予以解决。

Two kinds of problems

One thing I’ve been asked is why I’m not writing more about relief for homeowners and other kinds of bottom-up aid to the economy. Probably I should be saying more. But in defense, let me say that there are two kinds of economic problems right now.

The most acute problems involve the run on the financial system. This has to be brought under control if we want to avoid a 1931-style collapse. And things like homeowner workouts quite simply won’t deliver enough relief to bank capital, and certainly not fast enough, to help significantly on that front. So there’s a financial relief imperative, which mainly involves injection of capital and guarantees of liquidity.

Now, on top of that we’ve got the economy’s slide into recession, which will continue even if the high-speed financial crisis is brought under control. What we need there is action on many things: fiscal stimulus, aid to state and local governments, homeowner relief, and more.

It’s important to work on both kinds of problems, but it’s also important not to imagine that solving either one automatically solves the other. And the slower-motion issues, realistically, won’t be effectively addressed for a while, probably until whatshisname moves out of the White House. The high-speed stuff, on the other hand, had better be addressed in the next few days.

注:保罗·克鲁格曼(PAUL KRUGMAN)现为美国普林斯顿大学公共事务和国际事务学院的经济学教授。他曾经是斯坦福大学的教授和麻省理工学院的教授。1991年,年轻的克鲁格曼获得美国经济学会克拉克奖,名声大噪,克拉克奖被视为诺贝尔奖的重要指针,因此,保罗·克鲁格曼是诺贝尔奖的当然候选人。大约十年前,他的著作《萧条经济学的回归》发表,一时洛阳纸贵。克鲁格曼在1996年的《流行国际主义》一书中准确预言了亚洲金融危机。

这是他的博客地址:http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

沧浪之水清兮可以濯我缨,沧浪之水浊兮可以濯我足。

14
老鱼父 发表于 2008-10-14 00:37:00

Moment of Truth

by Paul Krugman  10-09 2008 NYtimes

Last month, when the U.S. Treasury Department allowed Lehman Brothers to fail, I wrote that Henry Paulson, the Treasury secretary, was playing financial Russian roulette. Sure enough, there was a bullet in that chamber: Lehman’s failure caused the world financial crisis, already severe, to get much, much worse.

The consequences of Lehman’s fall were apparent within days, yet key policy players have largely wasted the past four weeks. Now they’ve reached a moment of truth: They’d better do something soon — in fact, they’d better announce a coordinated rescue plan this weekend — or the world economy may well experience its worst slump since the Great Depression.

Let’s talk about where we are right now.

The current crisis started with a burst housing bubble, which led to widespread mortgage defaults, and hence to large losses at many financial institutions. That initial shock was compounded by secondary effects, as lack of capital forced banks to pull back, leading to further declines in the prices of assets, leading to more losses, and so on — a vicious circle of “deleveraging.” Pervasive loss of trust in banks, including on the part of other banks, reinforced the vicious circle.

The downward spiral accelerated post-Lehman. Money markets, already troubled, effectively shut down — one line currently making the rounds is that the only things anyone wants to buy right now are Treasury bills and bottled water.

The response to this downward spiral on the part of the world’s two great monetary powers — the United States, on one side, and the 15 nations that use the euro, on the other — has been woefully inadequate.

Europe, lacking a common government, has literally been unable to get its act together; each country has been making up its own policy, with little coordination, and proposals for a unified response have gone nowhere.

The United States should have been in a much stronger position. And when Mr. Paulson announced his plan for a huge bailout, there was a temporary surge of optimism. But it soon became clear that the plan suffered from a fatal lack of intellectual clarity. Mr. Paulson proposed buying $700 billion worth of “troubled assets” — toxic mortgage-related securities — from banks, but he was never able to explain why this would resolve the crisis.

What he should have proposed instead, many economists agree, was direct injection of capital into financial firms: The U.S. government would provide financial institutions with the capital they need to do business, thereby halting the downward spiral, in return for partial ownership. When Congress modified the Paulson plan, it introduced provisions that made such a capital injection possible, but not mandatory. And until two days ago, Mr. Paulson remained resolutely opposed to doing the right thing.

But on Wednesday the British government, showing the kind of clear thinking that has been all too scarce on this side of the pond, announced a plan to provide banks with £50 billion in new capital — the equivalent, relative to the size of the economy, of a $500 billion program here — together with extensive guarantees for financial transactions between banks. And U.S. Treasury officials now say that they plan to do something similar, using the authority they didn’t want but Congress gave them anyway.

The question now is whether these moves are too little, too late. I don’t think so, but it will be very alarming if this weekend rolls by without a credible announcement of a new financial rescue plan, involving not just the United States but all the major players.

Why do we need international cooperation? Because we have a globalized financial system in which a crisis that began with a bubble in Florida condos and California McMansions has caused monetary catastrophe in Iceland. We’re all in this together, and need a shared solution.

Why this weekend? Because there happen to be two big meetings taking place in Washington: a meeting of top financial officials from the major advanced nations on Friday, then the annual International Monetary Fund/World Bank meeting Saturday and Sunday. If these meetings end without at least an agreement in principle on a global rescue plan — if everyone goes home with nothing more than vague assertions that they intend to stay on top of the situation — a golden opportunity will have been missed, and the downward spiral could easily get even worse.

What should be done? The United States and Europe should just say “Yes, prime minister.” The British plan isn’t perfect, but there’s widespread agreement among economists that it offers by far the best available template for a broader rescue effort.

And the time to act is now. You may think that things can’t get any worse — but they can, and if nothing is done in the next few days, they will.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/opinion/10krugman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-10-14 0:41:41编辑过]

沧浪之水清兮可以濯我缨,沧浪之水浊兮可以濯我足。

15
wumengshan 发表于 2008-10-14 16:50:00
[em01][em01][em01]

16
xmzhermione 发表于 2008-10-15 01:10:00
以前居然没有注意过,太好了
看惯了,白衣苍狗

17
老鱼父 发表于 2008-10-16 01:02:00
当今世界最杰出的经济学家之一,《纽约时报》最敢直言和最具影响力的专栏作家,充满热情和感染力的演讲者 保罗·克鲁格曼

  沈明高:  保罗·克鲁格曼(Paul Krugman)教授获得了2008年诺贝尔经济学奖,对于他的很多同事和学生来讲,这是意料之中的事。早在他于1991年获得克拉克经济学奖的时候,很多人就预测他获得诺贝尔奖只是时间问题。克拉克奖每两年颁发一次,获奖者必须是40岁以下的年轻经济学家,并且已经对经济学知识作出了重大贡献。由于获得这一奖项的很多经济学家后来都获得了诺贝尔奖,它已经成为预测诺贝尔奖最重要的先行指标。
  克鲁格曼是当今世界最杰出的经济学家之一,同时也是美国《纽约时报》最敢直言和最具影响力的专栏作家。他还是一个充满热情和感染力的演讲者。
  1974年,克鲁格曼获得耶鲁大学学士学位,之后就读于麻省理工大学,并取得了博士学位。毕业后,克鲁格曼曾先后在麻省理工大学和斯坦福大学任教。2000年至今,克鲁格曼一直在普林斯顿大学担任教授。
  克鲁格曼是一位高产作家,他先后出过20多本专著,其中比较有名的作品有《兜售繁荣》(Peddling Prosperity)、《流行的国际主义》(Pop Internationalism)等。此外,他还在权威期刊上发表了200多篇文章,并在《纽约时报》《财富》和《石板》杂志担任专栏作家。媒体记者和学界同行都称赞他是“伟大的批评家”。
  克鲁格曼在学术上的主要集中在发展了“新贸易理论”。1979年7月,克鲁格曼在国家经济研究局的探讨会上演讲,首次发表了自己的观点,收到非常大的反响。之后,克鲁格曼又发表了三篇著名的文章,奠定了他在国际贸易领域中的权威(那三篇文章分别是“报酬递增、垄断性竞争和国际贸易”,《国际经济学杂志》,1979年;“规模经济、产品差异化和贸易方式”,《美国经济评论》,1980年,“产业间分工和贸易福利”,《政治经济杂志》,1981年)。
  最初,克鲁格曼是使用亚当·斯密的方法,以劳动分工可以削减成本为基础。克鲁格曼尝试着解释,亚当·斯密的理论为什么与现实的贸易模式有非常明显的差异。
  克鲁格曼擅长经济建模,这使得他拥有好的分析工具,可以在传统的被简化的理论基础上继续深入研究。传统的贸易理论是以完全竞争市场为前提假设,并且在这种假设下不会有经济规模效益一说。在克鲁格曼之前,国际贸易模式主要是被理解为国家之间存在着差异。李嘉图的解释是国际贸易发生在存在相对比较优势的两个国家之间。俄林解释贸易发生在两个要素禀赋不同的国家之间。但是20世纪60年代,人们观察到的现象却是,国际贸易越来越发生在经济发展程度相仿的国家之间。
  透过垄断竞争理论,我们可以看到,为什么国际贸易在要素禀赋相似的国家之间突飞猛进地发展。其中一个进步就是将完全竞争市场之外的市场模式,例如寡头垄断的市场,引入国际贸易模型。克鲁格曼的贸易理论是在李嘉图的基础上向前迈了一步,他引入了垄断竞争模型,指出相似国家发生了大量产业间贸易,阐释了传统的贸易理论无法解释的贸易现象。
  他还是经济地理的主要开创者。经济地理主要研究一些地区(如硅谷)怎样和如何实现专业化,并且产业集群如何为公司和经济带来好处。比如,自从1850年以来,纽约的伊利运河(Erie Canal)并没有很大的商业流量,但这一条运河带来的先发优势,使得纽约成为美国最大的城市和主要商业中心,并且保持至今。
  由于他的工作,“报酬递增”理论被引入经济学主流。报酬递增是一个技术性名词,它意味着一个成功可以催生下一个成功,也就是说经济是动态的,而不是静态的;经济中面临的独特选择最终决定于初始优势的积聚,而这一过程可能是历史的偶然。他将报酬递增运用于国际贸易和地理集群。
  他同时还是位犀利的政策评论人。他在1982年曾经出任里根政府的官方经济学家,专门处理上世纪80年代初的经济衰退中的国际贸易问题。但是他的自由主义政治决定了他为政府工作的时间很短。此后,他成为政策观察家和评论家。他的很多看法总是与众不同,他是这样评价华盛顿的政策决定的:“很多资深官员并不清楚他们在说的是什么……而且,很多有权力的人喜欢接受一些人的建议,主要是因为这些人的建议让他们感到舒服,而不是因为这些人会让他们认真思考。那些真正对政策有影响力的人通常是最会拍马溜须的人,而不是最好的分析师。我认为我是一个合格的分析师,但肯定不是一个称职的拍马屁师。”
  对这次美国次贷危机,他曾经有过预见性的分析。在2006年2月13日发表于《纽约时报》的专栏中,他指出,从进口与出口规模的简单比较就可以发现,美国人花费的比他们挣的要多57%。
  美国人是如何“超消费”的呢?这主要是通过向日本、中国和中东石油国家借债的方式来完成的。他说,“我们对于进口钱就像进口石油那样着迷”。有时,大量借入外债是有意义的。在19世纪,美国从欧洲借了很多钱,用于修建铁路和其他工业基础设施。那一次借债支持的投资增长使得美国更强大,而不是更衰弱。但最近以来美国的外债主要不是用来推动投资,考虑到经济的规模,商业投资的水平处于历史低位;更多借来的钱被用来修建房屋,购买消费品,并且为联邦预算赤字融资。
  克鲁格曼肯定地认为,这样的消费方式是不可持续的。或早或晚,美国的贸易赤字将不得不下降,住房繁荣将会终结,美国的消费者和美国政府将不得不回归到经济的基本面。他还指出,由于太多的经济参与者有着不切实际的预期,美国未来将面临的调整不大可能是“软着落”,而是一种“崩盘式”的调整。
  克鲁格曼曾经因为准确地预见亚洲金融危机而名闻天下,这一次,他很可能再次不幸言中。

http://www.caijing.com.cn/2008-10-14/110019879.html

[此贴子已经被作者于2008-10-16 1:07:11编辑过]

沧浪之水清兮可以濯我缨,沧浪之水浊兮可以濯我足。

18
lori__86 发表于 2008-10-16 17:08:00
学习学习!

19
于子昔 发表于 2009-3-11 23:03:00

哎……又是天才一个啊!!!!

想我自己的经济学学的那么坎坷………………

20
sgjw 发表于 2009-3-22 11:52:00
一个天才的过程,如此令人惊羡啊

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
jg-xs1
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2025-12-25 04:03