The cetera are not paribus.

On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Eugene Coyle <[email protected]> wrote:

> What does Krugman mean by "imperfect reality" in this sentence:
> "Economists trying to take account of imperfect reality faced ...  " ?
>
> Gene
>
>
> On Sep 14, 2014, at 9:01 PM, Eubulides <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > [And this from a man who has railed against the notion of “economic
> policy” as a morality play. Sin and epistemology, indeed. Well before I was
> born, ‘the positivists’ had massive arguments over the so-called boundary
> between metaphysics and science; the legal profession, between the public
> and the private. And yet, today, we get the same old tired partitioning in
> order to sustain a pantina of disciplinary expertise under the guise of a
> confession. Foucault is howling…]
> >
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/15/opinion/paul-krugman-how-to-get-economic-policy-wrong.html
> >
> > How to Get It Wrong
> > SEPT. 14, 2014
> > Paul Krugman
> >
> > Last week I participated in a conference organized by Rethinking
> Economics, a student-run group hoping to promote, you guessed it, a
> rethinking of economics. And Mammon knows that economics needs rethinking
> in the wake of a disastrous crisis, a crisis that was neither predicted nor
> prevented.
> >
> > It seems to me, however, that it’s important to realize that the
> enormous intellectual failure of recent years took place at several levels.
> Clearly, economics as a discipline went badly astray in the years —
> actually decades — leading up to the crisis. But the failings of economics
> were greatly aggravated by the sins of economists, who far too often let
> partisanship or personal self-aggrandizement trump their professionalism.
> Last but not least, economic policy makers systematically chose to hear
> only what they wanted to hear. And it is this multilevel failure — not the
> inadequacy of economics alone — that accounts for the terrible performance
> of Western economies since 2008.
> >
> > In what sense did economics go astray? Hardly anyone predicted the 2008
> crisis, but that in itself is arguably excusable in a complicated world.
> More damning was the widespread conviction among economists that such a
> crisis couldn’t happen. Underlying this complacency was the dominance of an
> idealized vision of capitalism, in which individuals are always rational
> and markets always function perfectly.
> >
> > [snip]
> > _______________________________________________
> > pen-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
>



-- 
Cheers,

Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to