Can you show me a goldbug with a Nobel Prize in Economics and a column in a New York Times-class newspaper or other similar venue?

I know what you're saying, and it is literally true, I don't deny that. But Krugman should be held to a higher standard.

Personally, I find him very disappointing. A guy with a Nobel Prize in Economics ought to be making compelling arguments that are a surprise to me, and thus contain information in the information theoretic sense. (That's my favorite way of looking at information in an English context.) Instead, I can predict in advance what Krugman's position on a topic will be now with virtually 100% confidence, which should not be possible if he's actually writing with insight that someone of such stature should be bringing to topics, as I most assuredly hold a Nobel Prize in absolutely nothing. Even if he chooses doctrinaire liberal choices completely reliably, he should be able to defend them with far more interesting arguments than I actually see from him, the kind of interesting that even when you disagree you at least stop to think.