4 ms·

> most people would surely think An example of groupthink? If you haven't studied economics in graduate school, you may not be aware that the field is very di

by xapata 10y ago

> most people would surely think An example of groupthink? If you haven't studied economics in graduate school, you may not be aware that the field is very different than what is taught in traditional undergraduate economics classes. There are different branches, of course, but the field emphasizes modeling and acceptance of initially-unintuitive results based on careful analysis of system dynamics. Many people can think through the second-order effects (and beyond) of some policy change. Economists are just one group that has been trained to do so.

gone35 10y ago
An example of groupthink? Freshwater macro, for one.
- xapata 10y ago
  Every discipline has its cliques. And I meant "an example" in the sense that justifying a thought on the basis that "most people think" is an example of groupthink.
  - gone35 10y ago
    If you haven't studied economics in graduate school, you may not be aware of the extent to which freshwater-like fundamentalism is embedded in the core ansätze of the discipline.
    - xapata 10y ago
      Nice word choice. You even got the accent character in there. I found freshwater thinking to be refreshingly criticized in my department. I suppose we were a little closer to the coast than the lakes.
AllegedWisdom 10y ago
Excellent comment. Many people associate 'economist' with politicized talking heads arguing about ideological issues, but that is a tiny fraction of the profession, just like the most politicized tech CEOs are the tiny fraction of the tech community that gets the most outside attention.
- maxxxxx 10y ago
  Good point. I equate economists generally with ideologues on TV but that's probably as well as founded as thinking software developers are out of shape nerds in Hawaii shirts.
cowardlydragon 10y ago
Economics is a highly politicized "science" however. Desperate for their pet views self-validating their world dominance, endowed chairs, think tanks, consulting, and special access to finance deals fundamentally skew the practice of economics at an academic level, essentially bribing them into line with oligarchical capitalism / "Reaganomics". Economists routinely are placed in politically powerful positions, invariably due in large part to their professed views on economics being in line with a dominant political (aka rich cabal or pro-industry) view of economics. If economics was truly up to snuff, it would be at the forefront of guiding policy to resolve the existential threat our global scale environmental disruption poses to us as a species, which is a direct result of the imperfect economic systems of the world. But the fundamental problems in economics remain: - if you can't measure it, it doesn't really exist to economics, especially to academics - if it isn't going to run out in three months or kill you in three months, it doesn't matter and is ignored by economic study Of course those two points are slight exaggerations, but if one views the long course of economic study, they become pretty apparent.
- true_religion 10y ago
  > If economics was truly up to snuff, it would be at the forefront of guiding policy to resolve the existential threat our global scale environmental disruption poses to us as a species, which is a direct result of the imperfect economic systems of the world. Economics can predict 'disaster' but does not have anything to say about whether or not disaster should be avoided. To give an example closer to home, in W. Africa predominant economists believe (but do not publicly say) the AIDs crises is not a general threat to humanity. AIDs rates will increase until a peak point, then society will self-correct whether this is via enforced monogamy rituals, enhanced testing, stigmatisation of carriers, wide-spread STD protection, better medical care for carriers to prevent morality, or other methods is besides the point. What method you choose to promote is a political question, not an economic one. Just because something increases X in circumstance A, does not bear into question if circumstance A is really something you want even if X is "lower mortality rates". Economists in international organisations learn this truth, and have to be extremely careful not to substitute their own personal bias, or the preferences of their society for that of their client. For a non-morbid example, working in the US an economists would be tasks to report on how to best expand the existing highway system. Taking a step back, and saying "we should all use bullet trains and live in dense cities", isn't going to be appreciated as the 'American Dream' is predicated on suburban living.

by xapata 10y ago

gone35 10y ago

An example of groupthink? Freshwater macro, for one.

xapata 10y ago
Every discipline has its cliques. And I meant "an example" in the sense that justifying a thought on the basis that "most people think" is an example of groupthink.
- gone35 10y ago
  If you haven't studied economics in graduate school, you may not be aware of the extent to which freshwater-like fundamentalism is embedded in the core ansätze of the discipline.
  - xapata 10y ago
    Nice word choice. You even got the accent character in there. I found freshwater thinking to be refreshingly criticized in my department. I suppose we were a little closer to the coast than the lakes.

AllegedWisdom 10y ago

Excellent comment. Many people associate 'economist' with politicized talking heads arguing about ideological issues, but that is a tiny fraction of the profession, just like the most politicized tech CEOs are the tiny fraction of the tech community that gets the most outside attention.

maxxxxx 10y ago
Good point. I equate economists generally with ideologues on TV but that's probably as well as founded as thinking software developers are out of shape nerds in Hawaii shirts.

cowardlydragon 10y ago

Economics is a highly politicized "science" however. Desperate for their pet views self-validating their world dominance, endowed chairs, think tanks, consulting, and special access to finance deals fundamentally skew the practice of economics at an academic level, essentially bribing them into line with oligarchical capitalism / "Reaganomics". Economists routinely are placed in politically powerful positions, invariably due in large part to their professed views on economics being in line with a dominant political (aka rich cabal or pro-industry) view of economics. If economics was truly up to snuff, it would be at the forefront of guiding policy to resolve the existential threat our global scale environmental disruption poses to us as a species, which is a direct result of the imperfect economic systems of the world. But the fundamental problems in economics remain: - if you can't measure it, it doesn't really exist to economics, especially to academics - if it isn't going to run out in three months or kill you in three months, it doesn't matter and is ignored by economic study Of course those two points are slight exaggerations, but if one views the long course of economic study, they become pretty apparent.

true_religion 10y ago
> If economics was truly up to snuff, it would be at the forefront of guiding policy to resolve the existential threat our global scale environmental disruption poses to us as a species, which is a direct result of the imperfect economic systems of the world. Economics can predict 'disaster' but does not have anything to say about whether or not disaster should be avoided. To give an example closer to home, in W. Africa predominant economists believe (but do not publicly say) the AIDs crises is not a general threat to humanity. AIDs rates will increase until a peak point, then society will self-correct whether this is via enforced monogamy rituals, enhanced testing, stigmatisation of carriers, wide-spread STD protection, better medical care for carriers to prevent morality, or other methods is besides the point. What method you choose to promote is a political question, not an economic one. Just because something increases X in circumstance A, does not bear into question if circumstance A is really something you want even if X is "lower mortality rates". Economists in international organisations learn this truth, and have to be extremely careful not to substitute their own personal bias, or the preferences of their society for that of their client. For a non-morbid example, working in the US an economists would be tasks to report on how to best expand the existing highway system. Taking a step back, and saying "we should all use bullet trains and live in dense cities", isn't going to be appreciated as the 'American Dream' is predicated on suburban living.