Which economist should have won the Nobel before he died?

A colleague lent me George Stigler Memoirs of unregulated economistsAnd the book makes me think about economists Can Nobel laureate, Should Received the Nobel Prize, but did not receive. It abolished anyone who died before 1969, when the first Nobel laureates in economics were awarded to Ragnar Frisch and Jan Tinbergen “for creating and applying dynamic models for the analysis of economic processes.” In 1901, Joseph Schumpeter (1883-1950), Carl Menger (1840-1921), and Eugene von Boehm-Bawark (1851, as the Nobel was established in 1901, eliminated many obvious names for those who could have won it if the Nobel had been established in 1901). , And it excludes economists who deserve it but are still alive (Arnold Harburger, Thomas Sowell, Israel Kirzner, Deidre McCloskey, Joel Mocker and Claudia Goldin, for example). Here is a list with links to some of the things I’ve written about them, where applicable

1. Mrs. Ludwig von Mrs. (1881-1973). Mrs. wrote four truly great books: Theory of money and debt (1912), Socialism: An economic and sociological analysis (1922), Human action (1949), and Theory and history (1957). His most important contribution, in my opinion, was his explanation of why socialism was “impossible” as an economic system. Even his little book, now distributed in the অনলাইন 0 online edition by the Liberty Fund and the institute bearing his name, is an excellent read. His English prose is amazing for its clarity and accuracy that he was writing which was not his first (German) or even his second language (French). Friedrich Hayek won the Nobel Prize in 1974, the year after Mieses’ death (which I have heard, some speculated that it was a deliberate move by the Nobel Committee), so at least some of the ideas he developed and the research program he contributed to deserve. Has gained recognition. He is on the list of economist Timothy Taylor and has no less authority than Paul Samuelson (the first American to win the Nobel Prize and in many ways the father of post-World War II economics). List of winners in economics if the prize was awarded between 1901 and 1930 (see footnote on page 358).

2. Frank H. Knight (1885-1972). I heard it said around the University of Chicago, “There is no God, and Frank Knight is his prophet.” The knight was Deidre McCloskey, known as the “Good Old Chicago School,” and was a mentor to many members of the Nobel laureate, known as the “Short-of-Good Old Chicago School.” One of the two pictures hung in the office of 1986 Nobel laureate James M. Buchanan was one of them; The other was Knut Weeksell. Knight is best known for his 1921 book Risk, uncertainty, and profitWhich has made a significant difference between the two Risk And Uncertainty And that laid the foundation for our understanding of entrepreneurship and profitability in a commercial society. He has written extensively on ethics and was a first-time visitor to the Thomas Jefferson Center at Buchanan, University of Virginia. There he gave lectures which were later published Intelligence and democratic action, Which I have discussed here. You can find an annotated bibliography of Knight’s work here, probably compiled by Ross Emmett, one of the world’s leading knight scholars.

3. Gordon Tulk (1922-2014). It is perhaps understandable that the Nobel Committee did not get close to awarding the prize to Miesse and Knight, who died in economics at a young age. It is much less understandable that Gordon Tullock made it a tomb without a Nobel. Tullock probably should have shared the 1986 award with Buchanan for developing public preference as a separate field for their initial work, but other than that, he deserved the Nobel for his rent-seeking analysis (which, presumably, he shared with Ann Krueger). And Jagadish Bhagwati). He was its founding editor Public choiceAnd his path-breaking achievement was certainly Nobel-worthy.

4. Armen Alchian (1914-2013) and Harold Demsetz (1930-2019). Alchian and Demsetz go together as the two main lights of the UCLA School of Economics, summarized and described. The Essential UCLA School of Economics David R. By Henderson and Steven Globerman and accompanying videos. UCLA’s Department of Economics was described as “Chicago on the West Coast” and has many similarities with the University of Chicago. 1972 co-author of Alchian and Demsetz American Economic Review The paper “Production, Data Cost, and Economic Organizations” has 21,000 quotes. Among Alchian’s many contributions, he showed that while firms may not consciously try to maximize profits, profit maximization is an important feature of survival in a competitive economy. Demsetz is responsible for identifying his 1969 what we now call “Nirvana Fallacy.” Journal of Law and Economics Paper “Information and Skills: Another Perspective” and its 1967 development of the economic theory of property rights American Economic Review Article “Towards a theory of property rights.” The great economist Walter Williams, who died in 2020, was trained at UCLA and it was also the intellectual home of Thomas Sowell for a short time.

5. William Baumal (1922-2017). Baumal was one of the first economists I “knew;” Her textbook (with Alan Blinder) was assigned to me in the spring of 1998 when I was pursuing macroeconomic policy. Several years ago, I argued that Baumal and his NYU colleague Israel Kirzner should share the prize for contributions to entrepreneurial theory. With Baumol dying in 2017, Kirzner’s already-thin prospects are slimmer. Baumol’s regular Nobel conversations, and his 2002 book Free market innovation machine A fantastic exploration of how entrepreneurs survive in a commercial society that Schumpeter calls the “perennial storm of creative destruction.” He is most famous for being known as “Baumal’s Cost Disease”, which explains why labor costs increase in sectors where productivity increases more slowly than in other sectors. Increasing productivity in the dynamic sector increases the opportunity cost of a worker to get a job in the stagnant sector অত therefore, labor costs increase in the stagnant sector. Higher education is a good example. If productivity continues to grow very slowly in higher education, where variations of “chuck-and-talk” discourse are still the mainstay of supply, while it is growing rapidly in other sectors such as technology or financial services, labor costs in higher education will rise because these teaching professors There are more interesting options outside.

6. Julian Simon (1932-1998). I explained in the linked article, the middle name of our little boy Simon Because of Julian Simon’s work. Simon deserves a prize for his explanation of how the human mind is The ultimate asset And his careful analysis of the experimental effects of his ideas. Simon’s most significant contribution came in his response to the prophecy about “Glumstar” Growth constraints (Published by the Club of Rome in 1972) and Population bomb (Published by Paul Ehrlich in 1968). Simon thought their predictions were fatally flawed because things are not “resources” that are independent of human ideas about how to use them. The population pressures that plagued the club and Ehrlich could raise prices in the short term; However, since need is the mother of innovation, people look for alternatives and come up with new ways to use things. Consider higher gas prices. If people expect them to be long enough, people look for alternatives like walking, carpooling or telecommuting. Simon is best known for winning his bet with the highly confident Paul Ehrlich (who was awarded the MacArthur Foundation “Genius” grant despite being visually mistaken). Economists Gail Puli and Marian Tupi examined data from 1900-2019 and found that Simon had won 69.9% of the bets at that time (excluding the war years) as opposed to the thesis he was “lucky”. They wrote: “(d) During this 119-year period, the value of five-metal baskets decreased by 87.2 percent, despite significant increases in the population of the United States and the world.” To show that is actually a high population Creates Instead of consuming resources by the apparent magic of intelligence and thus showing that a high population is a blessing instead of a curse, Simon deserves the Nobel Prize. In the Marvel Cinematic Universe, the wide range of his ideas, ideally, could probably convince Thanos that his plan to save the universe by wiping out half of his life was actually crazy.

7. WH Hutt (1899-1988). If you’ve heard of the term “consumer sovereignty”, you know at least one contribution of the market. He has done much more to promote consumer sovereignty, to sharply criticize Keynesian macroeconomics throughout his book, and perhaps to be rewarded. Theory of passive resources, He rehabilitated the lawAnd Keynesian episode (With its forerunner Keynesianism: retrospect and prospectAnd its analysis of labor unions and restrictions on the labor market (a Theory of Combined Bargaining, Strike-threat systemAnd The economy of the color bar) Philip W. With Magnus and Ilya Murtazashvili, I am trying to change the fact that there is no place for hats in the pantheon of great economists. We have discussed its constitutional political economy in a recent issue in this paper Independent review And his criticism of the color bar on a piece of paper continues but here is an early version of it.

8. Aaron Director (1901-2004). The director did not disclose too much, I am not nearly as familiar with the work of the other scholars on this list, and I must admit that I came to this conclusion after seeing a similar list of Donald Boudrocks since 2016. Despite his light publishing record, he had a profound effect on his colleagues at the University of Chicago. He was the brother of the Rose director and therefore Milton Friedman’s brother-in-law (he was also George Stigler’s best friend), but he “greatly influenced the modern course of economics and legal thought through his founding in law. Chronicle His death has been reported in the statement. He established law and economy – he established Journal of Law and Economics A Nobel-worthy contribution in 1958, and he hosted a famous dinner where Ronald Kos convinced the faculty of the University of Chicago that he was right and they were wrong – which was no credit: at the beginning of the dinner, economists were unanimous against Kos. After dinner, they agreed. In addition to having a significant influence in an important field, the director indirectly contributes to the scholarship of others through his influence.

The economists on this list were widely recognized (and respected) for their achievements. Mises, Tullock, Alchian, Demsetz, and Baumol are all well-known Fellows of the American Economic Association, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute was founded in 2001 by Julian L. Established the Simon Award. They are widely read and often quoted. None of them won the ultimate honor of the profession, though, though all were worthy. As more qualified economists move into their 70s, 80s and 90s, I can only hope this list will not be long.

Related Articles – Economic Education, Free Market, History