> See http://tinyurl.com/2vn5n for a recent discussion by Brad > DeLong on the budget deficits.
I read that, and the difference between Brad's and John's position on this topic illustrates why economics is not a science to me. John acknowledges that Brad is a respected economist. Brad states that the strong consensus opinion of economists is that the tax cuts are not good policy. Yet, John still differs with him. I cannot think of a BA physicist who respects a PhD physicist from a major school, yet takes a position that differs from him on a subject for which the first claims is broad agreement among the professionals. I cannot also think of respected physicists who support science they disagree with because of their boss's position. None of this is meant to insult anyone; John has a right to his opinion because economics is not science. But, as his lambasting of me points out, good technique and bad technique are considered quite different in the two fields. In physics, doing first order correlation calculations is considered good technique. If someone argues that there are important second order effects, it is incumbent on them to give a rigorous argument for that; complete with data and sound math. In economics, general arguments can be used to counter data analysis. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
