The only AEA session I attended was co-sponsored by URPE, so I can't judge Paul's remarks (though they seem to be right, based on evidence provided to me by an eyewitness observer, i.e., Paul). The AEA/URPE session was great, though generally depressing. Nancy Folbre and Fred Lee were great. Fred's discussion of the neoclassica/neoliberal revolution-from-above of the British economics departments meshed well with Roy Weintraub's lament of the way that the history of economic thought is being treated by the profession. Nancy's talk was funny and actually upbeat! The best line came from heterodox laissez-faire conservative Deidre (n� Don) McCloskey, who described the neoclassical theory of voting as being about the rational behavior of crazy people. (This is because in NC economics, it's irrational to vote.)
Other URPE sessions were good, but attendance was generally low. ------------------------ Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:04 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [PEN-L] Whither the AEA > > > An entirely subjective report from the AEA sessions of some trends > (compared to say five years ago). I am not writing about the sessions > organized by heterodox groups as there were too few of them for > generalizations.
