4 ms·
> attention given to the work of Thomas Piketty, with serious questions raised about the relationship between his data, his theory and the political stance whic
by obrero 11y ago
> attention given to the work of Thomas Piketty, with serious questions raised about the relationship between his data, his theory and the political stance which motivates his work.
Yes, you see, there are ideologically-driven economists like Piketty, who have a political stance. Then there are are the fair, neutral, unbiased economists who disagree with Piketty, who are only motivated by the search for the truth.
- triplesec 11y agoTruthy economists, you mean? Aha, the author must be such a neutral economist, a Fair and Balanced writer, a fine man! I don't need any substantive arguments from such as he. I'll take him at his fine gentlemanly word!
- Mikeb85 11y ago> Then there are are the fair, neutral, unbiased economists who disagree with Piketty, who are only motivated by the search for the truth. There is no such thing as truth in Economics. There's not even a defined goal. Creating a mathematical model of how 7 billion people behave in a global economy is impossible. You're always going to have to simplify your model enough for it to be useful, as the expense of something. That compromise is your bias. Economists always make assumptions about something, and those assumptions are always driven by some sort of world view. Not to mention, the other part of economics is deciding what policies or actions should be taken. Do you optimize for economic growth? For happiness? To reduce inequality? To eliminate poverty? Maximum employment? Other sciences describe things which can be replicated, or things which are (more or less) concrete. Economics can't be a concrete, truthful science because people are react to their environment, which is ever changing and will never be the same at 2 points in history. And everything affects human behaviour, from the weather to things like religion which aren't exactly concrete...
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- marcoperaza 11y ago> Not to mention, the other part of economics is deciding what policies or actions should be taken. Do you optimize for economic growth? For happiness? To reduce inequality? To eliminate poverty? Maximum employment? And if that's not difficult enough, you have to assign time-values to all of these. E.g. reducing inequality today might lower growth in 20 years. It's not called the dismal science for nothing.
- rankam 11y agoOut of genuine interest, which economists would you recommend if one wanted to read the works of economists who are only motivated by the search for the truth?
- barry-cotter 11y agoJust get a microeconomics textbook and a price theory textbook. Hal Varian's Intermediate Microeconomics is probably best if you know calculus. Undergraduate macro bears very little relation to what economists believe and macro is a mess besides. Olivier Blanchard, former director of the IMF wrote an article on the state of macro, pronouncing it good just before the Great Recession. The field has barely moved since then. Macro is an intellectual monoculture that's not going anywhere. I personally am partial to Scott Sumner, who blogs at the Money Illusion abd is a market monetarist.
- sobkas 11y agoEveryone knows that only economist that want to burn the poor and snort their ashes are free of any bias.