> If they have a lot of failures, then their credibility wanes accordingly. What if they also have a lot of successes? What if their successes outnumber their

> If they have a lot of failures, then their credibility wanes accordingly. What if they also have a lot of successes? What if their successes outnumber their "a lot of failures"? Can you measure a percentage/ratio between the two? A lot of people were predicting dire consequences of QE: > We believe the Federal Reserve’s large-scale asset purchase plan (so-called “quantitative easing”) should be reconsidered and discontinued. We do not believe such a plan is necessary or advisable under current circumstances. The planned asset purchases risk currency debasement and inflation, and we do not think they will achieve the Fed’s objective of promoting employment. * https://www.hoover.org/research/open-letter-ben-bernanke https://www.hoover.org/research/open-letter-ben-bernanke Krugman (and others) predicted things would be fine; Krugman was right. A lot of folks predicted "expansionary austerity" would be a good thing: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansionary_fiscal_contraction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansionary_fiscal_contractio... Krugman (and other Keynesians) thought it would be bad; Krugman et al was right: * https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/27/austerity-policies-do-more-harm-than-good-imf-study-concludes https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/27/austerity-p... * https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion https://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr...