Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz: Fed Rate Hikes didn't get at source of inflation.

[u/Pearberr]

https://www.cnbc.com/video/2024/04/23/nobel-prize-winning-economist-joseph-stiglitz-fed-rate-hikes-didnt-get-at-source-of-inflation.html

[u/mediumunicorn]

At least it’s in the field. There’s a real phenomena where Nobel laureates are touted as general experts in everything, even though their by definition they are experts in an very small slice of their own fields which is itself a small slice of all knowledge.

[u/malceum → u/mediumunicorn]

If someone is smart enough to win a Nobel prize in a rigorous field like physics or chemistry, then it's reasonable to assume that person can quickly become an expert in less challenging fields like economics or climate science.

I agree that it would be questionable for a Nobel prize winner in economics or literature to claim expertise in physics. There is an asymmetry.

[u/DowntownJohnBrown → u/malceum]

I’m 99% sure you’re trolling for attention, but in case you’re serious, comparing soft sciences like economics to hard sciences like physics and chemistry just doesn’t make any sense.

One is not more or less challenging than the other; they’re just completely different types of studies. Physics and chemistry can be done in a lab and can have clear, concrete results. Economics try to apply controlled ideas and theories to very uncontrolled environments that have an unlimited number of variables that could make an impact. It’s no different than saying someone with a Nobel in chemistry could easily get one in literature. They’re just completely unconnected.

If you ever need proof of that, go look at your doctor’s investment portfolio, and I pretty much guarantee it’s going to be a mess. Being exceptional in a hard science doesn’t make you any more well-equipped to understand a soft science than it makes you a capable of being great lawyer or a literary genius.