We don't use coal, it's gas and hydro. Entire renewable thing is subvented by your debt and you doesn't seem to complain about it :D

its not subvented by debt. its subvented by higher energie prices. our debt is there because we had to build up the east...

Ah, I see, I see. So renewables = higher energy prices after all? ;)

every for of energie gets subventions, but renewables are the only that get their subventions in a oen and clear way, not like nuclear, were we just get the bill after some years, or coal were its not only direct subventions, but also free co2 certificates and problematic use of police and other lawenforcing units to deport people from their land because coal is more important than people.

Yes, obviously. We are still very much in a development phase for renewable energy, and we still have long ways to go before we have reached the full potential of many different technologies, ranging from wind to tidal. However, as technology gets improved, and it's taken more widely into use, prices will go down, that's pretty basic economics.

Apparently you know better than Krugman. What's a Nobel prize worth, right? 

its not a fuckn nobel price he got...  there is no nobelprice for economics...

From wikipedia : "Krugman won the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel"

Also from Wikipedia:

"The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (officially Swedish: Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne, or the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel), commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics,^[1] and as a "category of the Nobel Prize" by the Nobel Foundation itself,^[2]which owns the name Nobel Prize,^[3][4] is an award for outstanding contributions to the field of economics, and generally regarded as the most prestigious award for that field.^[5] It is not one of the prizes that Alfred Nobel established in his will in 1895, but instead was established 73 years later by a donation to the foundation from Sweden's central bank, the Sveriges Riksbank, on the bank's 300th anniversary.^[5][6][7][8] Winners are announced with the Nobel Prize winners, and receive the award at the same ceremony.^"

The economics equivalent, give or take.

Barack Obama and Al Gore Have Nobel Prizes, that alone makes me give ZERO credibility to that title but that aside. the article is a fluff piece that completely ignores Greece's past failings to meet loan conditions, ignores previous write downs of debt and ignores the total lack of credibility Greece has as they are saying they will immediately do things that less than a week ago they claimed without question would not EVER be accepted. I don't care what his credentials are, when you write a fluff piece like that it doesn't matter whether you are the greatest economist in the world or a idiot, it is still horse shit.

Also like it or not the debate on this isn't purely economical, it is political, To accept Greece's proposal off hand would be a political poison pill for many of them, basically asking them to throw away their political future on behalf of Greece. If they are to have any chance to sell the agreement back to their own voters it has to be politically palatable, i.e. it can't look like Greece got favourable terms.

Lots of roads and parks that need to be run. Someone could also pull a Roosevelt and MAKE jobs. I hear he was a pretty popular president.