One invents flimsy rationales for policies the elites want to impose. The other explains to the public that those policies are "not good economics."
There is always a hypothetical better economics that isn't being implemented.
Friday, March 11, 2016
Economics, huh, yeah... What is it good for?
There are two types of economists...
One invents flimsy rationales for policies the elites want to impose. The other explains to the public that those policies are "not good economics."
There is always a hypothetical better economics that isn't being implemented.
One invents flimsy rationales for policies the elites want to impose. The other explains to the public that those policies are "not good economics."
There is always a hypothetical better economics that isn't being implemented.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Two types? Take a seminar with 15 participants and one is going to get at least 16 different viewpoints.
That's the trouble with economics as a science, or quasi-science for that matter. It relies on points of view rather than demonstrable facts. Or maybe I should say that in the field of economics demonstrable fact is dependent on point of view. But the job often pays well and one is never wrong.
"Take a seminar with 15 participants and one is going to get at least 16 different viewpoints."
None of which will acknowledge responsibility for past failures.
And all of which will insist that their point of view is based on an accurate model, the mathematics of which is usually sketchy at best.
Post a Comment