@OECD via @GarethShute @TheSpinoffTV show how small the cost of #globalwarming will be. GDP will several fold larger in 2100 so roll with the punches is best policy


Clearly, @NZTreasury didn’t read @paulkrugman before wining and dining @ProfSteveKeen as a #GFC prophet

From https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/oh-my-steve-keen-edition/ and see https://creditwritedowns.com/2012/04/banks-matter-krugmans-barter-mysticism.html for the text of broken link

Why am I reminded of Neoclassical Economics? Let me count the ways…

Firstly, there are similar underlying principles to the DSGE models that now dominate Neoclassical macroeconomics, and as with Ptolemaic Astronomy, these underlying principles clearly fail to describe the real world. They are:

  1. All markets are barter systems which are in equilibrium at all times in the absence of exogenous shocks—even during recessions—and after a shock they will rapidly return to equilibrium via instantaneous adjustments to relative prices;
  2. The preferences of consumers and the technology employed by firms are the “deep parameters” of the economy, which are unaltered by any policies set by economic policy makers; and
  3. Perfect competition is universal, ensuring that the equilibrium described in (1) is socially optimal.

If that were actually the real world, then not only would there not be a crisis now, there would never have been a Great Depression either—and recessions would simply be minor statistically unpredictable but inevitable events when the majority of shocks hitting the economy were negative, and they would rapidly be resolved by adjustments to relative prices (wages included, of course).

So economists like Krugman—who describe themselves as “New Keynesians”—have tweaked the base case to derive models that “ape” real-world data, with “sticky” prices rather than perfectly flexible ones, “frictions” that slow down quantity adjustments, and imperfect competition to generate less-than-optimal social outcomes.

This is Ptolemaic Economics: take a model that is utterly unlike the real world, and which in its pure form can’t possibly fit real world data, and then add “imperfections” so that it can appear to do so.

So @ProfSteveKeen understands neither rational expectations nor rational maximising! @Chris_Auld; @NZTreasury wasted taxpayers’ money on his visit too