Nobel Economics Prize Potential Winner Odds
Below you will find the potential winners of the Nobel Prize in Economics, via Ladbrokes, and online UK gambling shop, via Greg Mankiw.
As we have already learned, the prediction markets and online shops were totally wrong about the Nobel Peace Prize. This forecasting error was no surprise, and time permitting, I will explain why tomorrow.
Economic Nobel Winners Odds:
Eugene Fama 2/1
Paul Romer 4/1
Ernst Fehr 6/1
Kenneth R. French 6/1
William Nordhaus 6/1
Robert Barro 7/1
Matthew J Rabin 8/1
Jean Tirole 9/1
Martin Weitzman 9/1
Chris Pissarides 10/1
Dale T Mortensen 10/1
Xavier Sala-i-Martin 10/1
Avinash Dixit 14/1
Jagdish N. Bhagwati 14/1
Robert Schiller [sic] 14/1
William Baumol 16/1
Martin S. Feldstein 20/1
Christopher Sims 25/1
Lars P. Hansen 25/1
Nancy Stokey 25/1
Peter A Diamond 25/1
Thomas J. Sargent 25/1
Dale Jorgenson 33/1
Paul Milgrom 33/1
Oliver Hart 40/1
Bengt R Holmstrom 50/1
Elhanan Helpman 50/1
Ellinor Ostrom 50/1
Gene M Grossman 50/1
Karl-Goran Maler 50/1
Oliver Williamson 50/1
Robert B Wilson 50/1
October 11th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
If Fama’s theories were correct and he was going to win the prize, shouldn’t he be 1/1?
October 11th, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Which one hates Bush the most? It worked for Krugman last year……
October 11th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
Who the hell are most of these people? How about the REAL economics prize winner be a person who actually did a damn thing to help out the world’s economies? I’m tired of lame theorists winning.
October 11th, 2009 at 8:39 pm
Nouriel should be on the list. Maybe next year…
October 11th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Ben Bernanke for saving the world financial system with his printing press
October 11th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
Barry give us a Twitter post link also please!
~~~
BR: Really? Why?
October 11th, 2009 at 9:16 pm
“there is no Nobel Prize in economics. Not officially, anyway. The proper title of the award is the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economics in Memory of Alfred Nobel. But it is the Nobel Foundation that handles the details, and the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences that votes the award, just like the original prizes.
The Economics Prize was established in 1968, and given for the first time the following year (to pioneer econometricians Ragnar Frisch and Jan Tinbergen). The idea was to commemorate the founding of the Swedish central bank three centuries before, and to recognize the gradual maturation of the field.
The decision coincided with the high point in the prestige of the Keynesian achievement. Had its organizers been delayed, the award almost certainly never would have seen the light of day. The global economy entered an extended period of turbulence in the 1970s, and before long the prize had become an easy target for criticism. In 1974, for example, it was denounced by Swedish development economist Gunnar Myrdal, who shared it with Austrian theorist Friedrich Von Hayek. Myrdal took it anyway. ”
http://www.economicprincipals.com/issues/04.10.10.html
October 11th, 2009 at 10:05 pm
I don’t see my name on the list. What’s up with that?
October 11th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Let me guess, Bernanke for saving the world.
Might as well while we are in the business of thanking every useless a-hole on the planet.
My nominee is every man and woman who ever had to work for a decent living with a decent wage, it is gone, as Bush said to the lady who had to work three jobs to keep a roof on top of her and her three kids heads, it’s the American dream.
The new corporate dream of making shit money for a shit job while our corrupt government is planning to overtax us.
Fuck them all.
October 11th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
irrelevant
October 11th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
“bsneath Says:
Which one hates Bush the most? It worked for Krugman last year……”
You’d be surprised how much Krugman’s 1999 paper on liquidity influenced (scared) even the Bushies.
October 11th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Taleb. He was right all along.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taleb
October 11th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
Why isn’t Lakshman Achuthan on the list at about 5 for 4?
After all, it appears he (or whoever does the actual ECRI forecast) is never wrong.
http://www.businesscycle.com/reuters/freenews/2009/october/pdf/2y1zt8p5148gqc1.pdf
October 12th, 2009 at 12:36 am
Tom K, please don’t spoil my chances of winning. Either get in line or show me your Disney FASTPASS card. (Let’s keep this civil.)
October 12th, 2009 at 4:54 am
Maybe they should give it to Roubini, Taleb or Satyajit Das.
October 12th, 2009 at 5:56 am
As in horse racing, these are the odds against winning, i assume. Since i never won anything gambling, i’ll just pick the top guy Fama (who ever he is) as most likely to win (2/3 probability). This (my choosing him) almost guarantees that he won’t.
October 12th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Only a couple womens
October 12th, 2009 at 6:57 am
Uncle Ben will be Time magazine man of the year…if Time is still in business
October 12th, 2009 at 6:58 am
Unemployed running out of benefits, political scrapping unfolding
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/12/nyregion/12jobless.html?th&emc=th
October 12th, 2009 at 7:34 am
Looks like a couple of 50:1 shots take it.
October 12th, 2009 at 7:48 am
Two 50:1 shots tie for first . Now what are the odds of the happening? A forecast of 1:2500?
October 12th, 2009 at 9:08 am
What, no odds on Larry Summers? After Paul Lizza’s fawning encomium in last week’s New Yorker (see http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/10/12/091012fa_fact_lizza), you’d think he’d have some pretty good odds.
Honestly, after reading that article I am sorely tempted to cancel my subscription. It is the worst example of critical journalism I have ever suffered.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:12 am
I’m surprised that Lawrence Yun (The Big Picture’s favorite economist) is not on the list.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Ostrom and Williamson – 2, 50:1 shots
October 12th, 2009 at 9:19 am
[...] pair of 50/1 shots win the Nobel prize in Economics. (WSJ, Clusterstock, Real Time Economics, EconLog, Marginal [...]
October 12th, 2009 at 9:20 am
The most valuable use of Mr. Nobel’s invention would be to blast the Nobel prize–our modern-day version of sainthood in our hubristic worship of the human intellect–to oblivion.
Who really gives a damn? After awarding a peace prize to a man whose singular accomplishment was having the proper mix of black and white genes to make him electable against an aging representative of a regime forlorn of new ideas, why should anyone care who gets what Nobel?
October 12th, 2009 at 9:45 am
[...] we noted last night, Eugene Fama was the odds on favorite to win at thew various prediction markets at 2 to 1. The [...]
October 12th, 2009 at 10:22 am
For those who suggested Roubini get the prize, please read this:
http://www.erictyson.com/articles/20081024_1
October 12th, 2009 at 8:10 pm
Barak Obama 1.9/1
October 12th, 2009 at 9:02 pm
Obama’s not on the list. A lad from Ladbroke’s explained, on NPR, that Obama had started at 25/1 but ended up at 20/1 towards the end. Mankiw’s Ladbroke list is just uh..broke.
October 12th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
If you award a Nobel to me, I promise to do everything I can to earn it.