Even though you put that nice warning in the intro of this video, I still want to outline the manipulations Mr. Krugman employs:<br><br><br>What a cheap shot to Ayn Rand after the 40 minute mark.<br><br>He is also basically making ad hominems as well as a strawman argument.<br><br><br>Ad Hominem suggested: If you read or have read Ayn Rand, you are wrong and  don't understand economics, then the comparisons made with flat earthers also suggest ridicule should be employed. Notice that he doesn't really attack any of Rand's actual arguments (he suggests these people should be shunned from debate, typical fascist behavior). Not to even mention that there are or have been economists who don't agree with him and are/were for a far more laissez-faire society: Hayek (who also happened to win the Nobel prize), Friedman, Thomas Sowell, Ludwig von Mises etc. I suppose all of these people are extremists and the economic equivalent of flat-earthers, at least according to Krugman.<br><br><br>The only thing is, Hayek's theory of currency competition is beautifully showcased nowadays by the cryptocurrency world, while Krugman has not had a very good track record of being correct...<br><br><br>Strawman argument: if you read or have read Ayn Rand, you don't read anything else on economics. Easy to destroy this strawman he created. Much harder to destroy someone with actual arguments who is present at the debate and has read economics.<br><br><br>P.S.: Ayn Rand was a minarchist and did believe in a state, at least. Curious to know what he thinks of Murray Rothbard, who was an Anarcho-Capitalist - i.e.: for a stateless society. I suppose his ideas also have no merit at all and should be banned from "serious economic discussion".,(reply>), Dan Avram —Any “shot” at Ayn Rand is an “inexpensive shot,” lol...