This thread is filled with the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy and it's sad, so I can see where your question is coming from.
I personally like to read books from people who predicted things before they happened and try to understand their mindset.
Understanding finance...
One may not like its writing style but Nicolas Nassim Taleb's "The Black Swan" helped me understand how finance was indeed the crumbs of capitalism that Buffet hates.
Understanding economy...
Another one I love --but it's in french-- is Charles Gave. That economist (definitely not mainstream) did write, in 1999, that the introduction of the common currency in Europe (the Euro) would lead to: "Too many houses in Spain, too many industries in Germany and too many public servants in France. That Spain was going to state default, followed by Greece".
So he got the order wrong about Greece (which already default a first time and which is going to default again) and Spain, but besides that he was spot on.
And you cannot say: "If you take enough economists, one of them is going to predict the future". Because here the prediction was way too precise to be sheer luck. He did explain the precise mechanisms that would lead to that situation (and he did bet his money accordingly and made millions).
Basically after reading that you understand how wrong the Keynes school is and how Krugman totally lost it (yeah, let's mill a $1 trillion coin... Why not mill 26 of them and be done with the public debt right!?).
There are going to be more state defaults in Europe (it's not even opened up for debate), starting with Greece which is going to default again. There's going to either severe inflation or partial state default in the U.S. too unless public spendings are dramatically brought down. No way out.
I'd suggest not to read from people explaining the past or the present. It's not interesting. It's more interesting to take out older writings explaining what's going to happen in the future and why. People able to do that are the most critical thinkers ever.
These writers often use an aggressive tone but you have to bear with it: these people are right and they know it and hardly anyone is listening to them.
> Basically after reading that you understand how wrong the Keynes school is and how Krugman totally lost it (yeah, let's mill a $1 trillion coin... Why not mill 26 of them and be done with the public debt right!?).
I would suggest you read some Krugman ( or Keynes), the entire point of the $1 trillion as opposed to $26 trillion is, that the government owes roughly $1 trillion to itself. So you do not change anything, the coin is just to get around a law that is there to pretend that money is essentially the same stuff for a government as it is for a private citizen.
If you read a book like "Lords of Finance" you get a good idea why the Keynes school of thought won out. Granted it focuses on the last big financial bust but when you read it you can see a lot of similarities to what happened recently. I read a lot of economic books on both schools of thought and this is one of the best I've ever read.
Love him or hate him Bernanke is a real student of that era and here is a quote (from wikipedia, didn't do a background check on accuracy) "On September 2, 2010, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke was asked by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission what books or academic papers he would recommend to understand the financial crisis of 2007–2010. The only book that Bernanke recommended was Lords of Finance."
You say his predictions were "way to precise to be sheer luck", then point out he got some major points incorrect. It could still be a lucky prediction.
And the $1 trillion coin was a legal hack, nothing more.
I personally like to read books from people who predicted things before they happened and try to understand their mindset.
Understanding finance...
One may not like its writing style but Nicolas Nassim Taleb's "The Black Swan" helped me understand how finance was indeed the crumbs of capitalism that Buffet hates.
Understanding economy...
Another one I love --but it's in french-- is Charles Gave. That economist (definitely not mainstream) did write, in 1999, that the introduction of the common currency in Europe (the Euro) would lead to: "Too many houses in Spain, too many industries in Germany and too many public servants in France. That Spain was going to state default, followed by Greece".
So he got the order wrong about Greece (which already default a first time and which is going to default again) and Spain, but besides that he was spot on.
And you cannot say: "If you take enough economists, one of them is going to predict the future". Because here the prediction was way too precise to be sheer luck. He did explain the precise mechanisms that would lead to that situation (and he did bet his money accordingly and made millions).
Basically after reading that you understand how wrong the Keynes school is and how Krugman totally lost it (yeah, let's mill a $1 trillion coin... Why not mill 26 of them and be done with the public debt right!?).
There are going to be more state defaults in Europe (it's not even opened up for debate), starting with Greece which is going to default again. There's going to either severe inflation or partial state default in the U.S. too unless public spendings are dramatically brought down. No way out.
I'd suggest not to read from people explaining the past or the present. It's not interesting. It's more interesting to take out older writings explaining what's going to happen in the future and why. People able to do that are the most critical thinkers ever.
These writers often use an aggressive tone but you have to bear with it: these people are right and they know it and hardly anyone is listening to them.