Science vs. Humanities @DrBrianJohnson1 http://t.co/P4pmvDlDUP—
C. S. Prakash (@AgBioWorld) May 22, 2015
The different advisory roles of science and the humanities
08 Jun 2015 Leave a comment
in applied welfare economics Tags: evidence-based policy, methodology of economics, philosophy of science
The Triumph (and Failure) of John Nash’s Game Theory – The New Yorker
29 May 2015 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, history of economic thought, Public Choice Tags: conjecture and refutation, game theory, John Nash, methodology of economics, philosophy of science, philosophy of social sciences
John Maynard Keynes on the usefulness of mathematical economists
15 May 2015 Leave a comment
in Austrian economics, economics Tags: John Maynard Keynes, mathematical economics, methodology of economics
A new biography of John Maynard Keynes reveals him to be something of a polymath econ.st/1FdudRL http://t.co/Rz0ui9V1lB—
The Economist (@EconBizFin) May 13, 2015
Noah Smith and economists cannot forecast when the next recession will be
06 Mar 2015 1 Comment
in business cycles, macroeconomics Tags: conjecture and refutation, forecasting errors, Karl Popper, methodology of economics, Noah Smith, philosophy and social sciences, prophecy
Noah Smith is ranting today about how economists cannot forecast the timing of recession. He doesn’t use the most obvious argument.
That argument is if you are any good at picking the timing of the next recession, you wouldn’t go around talking and telling other people and publishing in the paper for all the world to hear.
You would keep quiet and trade in your own account, signing futures contracts and share options to take maximum advantage of seeing further than others. Show me the money, as Murray Rothbard explained:
Many studies, formal and informal, have been made of the record of forecasting by economists, and it has been consistently abysmal.
Forecasters often complain that they can do well enough as long as current trends continue; what they have difficulty in doing is catching changes in trend. But of course there is no trick in extrapolating current trends into the near future.
You don’t need sophisticated computer models for that; you can do it better and far more cheaply by using a ruler.
The real trick is precisely to forecast when and how trends will change, and forecasters have been notoriously bad at that. No economist forecast the depth of the 1981–82 depression, and none predicted the strength of the 1983 boom.
The next time you are swayed by the jargon or seeming expertise of the economic forecaster, ask yourself this question: If he can really predict the future so well, why is he wasting his time putting out newsletters or doing consulting when he himself could be making trillions of dollars in the stock and commodity markets?
Karl Popper argued that the job of the economist and other social scientists is not to be a prophet but to make conditional predictions such as if circumstances A apply, B will ensue. To do any more is to fall for the age-old allure of the prophet and his prophecies.
Gordon Tullock on the organisation of enquiry and the growth of knowledge
23 Feb 2015 Leave a comment
Hayek on why Keynesian macroeconomics initially became popular and stayed popular despite eventual empirical failure
31 Jan 2015 8 Comments
Some Ground Rules for the Minimum Wage debate
12 Jan 2015 1 Comment
in econometerics, labour economics, minimum wage Tags: methodology of economics, minimum wage
This is the best single paper I’ve seen written on the methodology of the minimum wage debate.
From a great blog I have just discovered, the author gives a good kicking to both sides for empiricial sloppiness, advocacy bias and plain bad economics. He also explains how to lift your game no matter where you are on the political spectrum.
Naturally, the author, Michael Tontchev, is an economics undergraduate.
My latest article for Turning Point USA. I suggest some aspects of the debate that just need to go away. Your thoughts?
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments