Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Loading...
Most Recent Stories

The Anti-Scientific Foundation of Macroeconomics

Interesting post here by Paul Krugman.  He discusses some of the rather illuminating lessons from the crisis and how some people have simply refused to alter their perceptions of the world despite these lessons.   For instance:

  • QE doesn’t cause hyperinflation or high inflation.
  • Fiscal policy doesn’t necessarily drive up interest rates.
  • Austerity can really hurt economies in a de-leveraging.

I don’t think the good professor goes far enough though.  There are other illuminating lessons from the crisis as well:

  • Being an autonomous currency issuer matters.
  • An increase in bank reserve won’t necessarily lead to more lending.
  • Inflation and hyperinflation aren’t necessarily monetary phenomenons.

These were big time lessons.  And yes, some people still haven’t understood them entirely or taken the time to really learn from these lessons.  In fact, some people are probably incentivized NOT to learn these lessons….

But I think there’s an even larger problem that leads to this sort of narrow minded thinking – and that’s the relatively unscientific foundation of macroeconomics to begin with.  For instance, in the hard sciences you learn a general framework for your field of study.  Physicists all learn about a basic set of understandings that form a common set of normative foundations for more experimental work.  But this isn’t really achieved in economics.  Depending on your “school” of economics you could have differing understandings of the foundations of what drives the economy.

That’s all kind of weird if you think about it, but there might be some good reasons for that.  After all, economics is at least partially the study of human action and human psychology is very much a soft science.  I also think economics has a tendency to become highly politicized and tends to be overcome by human biases.  But that doesn’t mean we should ignore what looks like some empirical truths.  In fact, if psychology and human biases are what potentially hurts economic progress then maybe all we need to do is try to be more aware of our weakness so we can establish a more objective foundation for understanding?

Comments are closed.