expatinowncountry
Registered
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 344
- Likes
- 260
Those of you filling your mouths with Keynesians theories, have you ever read Keynes? Do you know that several lines in economics called themselves Keynesian and they do not agree with each other in almost anything? Do you know that there is no such a thing as Keynesian or Austrian economic system (except for the economic system of Austria, the country!)?
Do you know that since the early 1980s we do not teach economics anymore in terms of school of economic thoughts? Do you know that almost no one takes seriously any school individually and that all the good contributions of the Austrian, Keynesian, Marginalists, Structuralists, etc, etc have been incorporated in mainstream economics that is what is taught in 95% (and for good reasons) of the Econ programs in the world (except for North Korea and some heterodox schools both in the extreme right and left).
Someone who has showed in this forum to be a total ignorant and fanatic, who uses dubious sources and fallacious arguments, and who cannot follow a simple line of reasoning has led some people in this forum to debate in terms of schools and systems when the reality is that we should be discussing ideas in a more pragmatic (and respectful) way and recognizing that we are part of a system that needs some (major) fixing that not single school of economic thought/authority/eminence will address individually.
Putting aside the fact that social disciplines (economics among them) may or may not be considered "science", in most cases (normal periods) progress and accumulation of scientific knowledge is done in a continuous way. Yes, from time to time, there are ruptures. We called them scientific revolutions and in some cases change in paradigm. Crisis situations like in the 1930s or the one we are experiencing now are propitious for this ruptures. However, let me reassure that Austrian economics is not this new magic bullet (and by the way, it is not even new).
Last, it is important to understand that there is always a huge gap between what an academic economist advocates and what a policy maker implements. And both are to be blamed for that gap. Economist in general are very bad policy makers, they fail to understand the complexity of the economic system outside a nice looking theoretical model, and they do not understand how the political process works. Politicians on the other side are... political animals... they care about the next election so they take what they think is convenient from an economic theory without looking too much into the details (or applying the prescription in full). If things go wrong, it was the theory and not him/her. For all you lovers of Austrian economics, the policy implications (some politicians) derived from this theory were implemented during the 1980s with very bad results. As always, you can either blame the theory, the policy maker, or as Crisitina does... you can blame the world.
Get warm cloth, it's cold outside.
Do you know that since the early 1980s we do not teach economics anymore in terms of school of economic thoughts? Do you know that almost no one takes seriously any school individually and that all the good contributions of the Austrian, Keynesian, Marginalists, Structuralists, etc, etc have been incorporated in mainstream economics that is what is taught in 95% (and for good reasons) of the Econ programs in the world (except for North Korea and some heterodox schools both in the extreme right and left).
Someone who has showed in this forum to be a total ignorant and fanatic, who uses dubious sources and fallacious arguments, and who cannot follow a simple line of reasoning has led some people in this forum to debate in terms of schools and systems when the reality is that we should be discussing ideas in a more pragmatic (and respectful) way and recognizing that we are part of a system that needs some (major) fixing that not single school of economic thought/authority/eminence will address individually.
Putting aside the fact that social disciplines (economics among them) may or may not be considered "science", in most cases (normal periods) progress and accumulation of scientific knowledge is done in a continuous way. Yes, from time to time, there are ruptures. We called them scientific revolutions and in some cases change in paradigm. Crisis situations like in the 1930s or the one we are experiencing now are propitious for this ruptures. However, let me reassure that Austrian economics is not this new magic bullet (and by the way, it is not even new).
Last, it is important to understand that there is always a huge gap between what an academic economist advocates and what a policy maker implements. And both are to be blamed for that gap. Economist in general are very bad policy makers, they fail to understand the complexity of the economic system outside a nice looking theoretical model, and they do not understand how the political process works. Politicians on the other side are... political animals... they care about the next election so they take what they think is convenient from an economic theory without looking too much into the details (or applying the prescription in full). If things go wrong, it was the theory and not him/her. For all you lovers of Austrian economics, the policy implications (some politicians) derived from this theory were implemented during the 1980s with very bad results. As always, you can either blame the theory, the policy maker, or as Crisitina does... you can blame the world.
Get warm cloth, it's cold outside.
