Streams

When a Nobel Prize Isn't Enough

Tuesday, June 14, 2011

2010 Nobel Prize-winning professor of economics at M.I.T. Peter Diamond discusses his recent decision to withdraw his nomination for the Federal Reserve Board and the state of the stalled presidential nominations. 

Guests:

Peter Diamond
News, weather, Radiolab, Brian Lehrer and more.
Get the best of WNYC in your inbox, every morning.

Comments [17]

superf88

can never understand how repubs and dems alike don't consider it to be the very antithesis of america's very building blocks when they don't push for transparency, regulation and a social safety net, but rather simply implore: "How can our government create jobs?"

Is non cancerous tap water for everyone really a harder, and more politically repugnant promise, than a chicken in every pot?

Jun. 14 2011 11:54 AM
Dennis from Manhattan

To put it plainly we'd rather run the economy on anecdotes and "common sense" than hard evidence and studies.

Jun. 14 2011 11:40 AM
The Truth from Becky

ALSO...How many issues can be handled effectively at one time...lest we forget the state of this Country in 2008....banks failing, AIG/Loheman Bros...the bailout, like it or not had to happen first, it was/is a matter of prioritizing, now he is on jobs, all of these issues remnants from the bush error. Talk about a 1 term president, we should have stopped after the first bush!

Jun. 14 2011 11:36 AM
Rick from Manhattan

Dear Martin C., they also gave an economics prize to the creators of rational expectations, the theoretical excuse for the oxymoron, supply-side economics. Current behavioral economics research is pretty well doing away with RE by showing that its principal assumptions, perfect information and unrelenting rational behavior are both fairy tales.

Jun. 14 2011 11:36 AM
John from NYC

Brian, thanks for this show -- it is now clear why this guy got rejected -- I won't say socialism, but we are hearing a lot of "planned economy" stuff here.

Jun. 14 2011 11:28 AM
Rick from Manhattan

Our unemployment is not cyclical. We have been stimulating to a fare-thee-well through wars, bailouts, tax cuts and loose monetary policy. The problem the economics world seems to ignore is that the US is now part of the world economy and the structural problems are international, unbalanced trade and over-reliance on foreign oil. Like those in economic policy positions now, it appears that Prof. Diamond does not have the answers.

Jun. 14 2011 11:27 AM
The Truth from Becky

There is truly no way for this President to win, had he not acted, he would have been crucified, he did act and he can't get an "atta boy" I am constantly amazed. He receives a nomination and award that he did not campaign for, not awarded by this Country and they still cry out...how do you define this behaviour?

Jun. 14 2011 11:26 AM
Amy from Manhattan

The problem is, how do you prove or even know how bad it *would* have gotten if something different had been done? It's very hard to convince people on something so hypothetical.

Jun. 14 2011 11:26 AM
Juli from Skillman, NJ

Dear Martin C:

What you and the rest of the conservatives do not get is that the the Nobel panel encourages intelligent change. Conservatives, by there very definition, demand stagnation rather than embracing dynamic change that will enhance whatever area of society that change is applicable. If we had allowed conservatives to continue with their stagnation practices, we would be without many advances that we enjoy today.

Jun. 14 2011 11:24 AM
David Wallance from Croton-on-Hudson NY

It may be true that the sudden increase in unemployment is cyclical, but is there not a trend among employers to capitalize on unemployment by replacing labor with technology, and by replacing on shore labor with off shore labor? Aren't these major structural trends?

Jun. 14 2011 11:23 AM
profwilliams from Montclair

He uses an argument that cannot be defined: it would have been worse, had we done nothing.

Ah, how does one figure that one out?

I don't have a Nobel Prize, but I'm not stupid.

Jun. 14 2011 11:19 AM

Yes!!!

Geithner WAS/CONTINUES TO BE part of the problem!!

Jun. 14 2011 11:18 AM
Dorothy from Manhattan

As a matter of policy - If Shelby is against it, I'm for it.

The Dems (president included) really seem to enjoy being punching bags. Otherwise, why would they be so good at it.

Jun. 14 2011 11:17 AM

The first commenter below constantly lowers the level of discourse by reducing everything to a "right-left" issue and using a nasty, rude tone. I notice he posted his comment before the segment even aired. I wonder why he even bothers to listen to this program -- which is about hearing different viewpoints -- when his mind is already made up?

Jun. 14 2011 11:10 AM
superf88

Don't be too quick to anoint this guy. I heard enough of his interview yesterday on another NPR show to be relieved that is will not have a strong hand in our monetary system. He wasn't using his listening ears and said things that were just fundamentally wrong.

For example, with irritation he responded to an out of work US born construction worker who called in, telling him it is ridiculous to assert that Spanish speaking immigrants pushed down pay in the housing construction industry. In fact, Bob Toll, CEO of America's biggest, richest maker of McMansions, has explained quite plainly many times that his business model pivots on a mix of high quality building materials assembled quickly by low cost immigrant workers.

Can't the Fed just find some ordinary academics with good listening ears and a bit of common sense?

Jun. 14 2011 11:05 AM

More GOP opposition to highly qualified candidates.

GOP obstructionism of Obama & GOP destruction of the economy is a major stumbling block for them in 2012.

This doesn't let POTUS off the hook for 3+ years of doing nothing about the real economy which is NOT Wall ST.

Jun. 14 2011 10:23 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

Oh, please, the Nobel prize has become a political farce ....awarded by Leftist Eurosocialists to other Leftists who pass the requisite political sniff test.

They gave one to a new President who hadn't yet assumed office in order to deter him from continuing or starting new wars (How did that work out, fellas?) They gave another one to Krugman to award (and encourage) his political writing and to increase his clout in clamoring for redistribution of wealth on the op-ed page of the NYT...not for his modest early body of work.

Bully for the Senate Republicans!!!!!!!Receiving this joke of an award is reason enough to be blocked for anything!
The left demeans anything it touches these days.

Jun. 14 2011 05:03 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.