 What was “The Legend of Arthur”?
Krugman's Life of Brian Where it all started: Paul Krugman's "The Legend of Arthur." I am reluctant to dignify his hatchet job with a lengthy reply, but some of his claims are so defamatory that they should be addressed, if only for the record. It was Klein's words, not those of Arthur, that prompted me to use Arthur in the lead of the story. I wrote no such thing, and Arthur has never, to my knowledge, claimed any such thing. 3) Pace Krugman, I also did not claim that Arthur bears principal responsibility for the rediscovery of increasing returns by economists in the 1970s and 1980s. As Krugman notes, several scholars (himself included) who were working in the fields of game theory and international trade published articles incorporating increasing returns before Arthur did. My claim was simply that Arthur applied increasing returns to high-technology markets, and that his work influenced how other economists and government officials think about these markets. In effect, he is accusing Brian Arthur, a man he calls a "nice guy," of being a fabricator or a liar. The quotes in question came from Arthur, and they were based on his recollections of two meetings that he attended some years ago. The fact of the matter is that I spend much of my life reading the work of mainstream economists, speaking to them, and trying to find something they have written that might interest the general public.
 A criticism of reporters who do not check their facts before publishing a story.
 A comparison of the economic models of simplicity and determinism.  A criticism of reporters who do not check their facts before publishing a story.  A criticism of the direction that macroeconomic research has taken during the past 20 years.  A criticism of economic scholars who take credit for others’ work.