pull down to refresh

You absolutely can and many do. These are distinct fields with distinct methodologies.
Public Policy incorporates Econ. Duke lists it first when describing their program.
Duke’s PhD in Public Policy is distinguished by its truly interdisciplinary nature. The program offers a unique balance of depth in a discipline such as:
economics political science psychology sociology
Most "top" unis are very similar.
reply
And economics incorporates mathematics and political science, but I don't consider myself to be either a mathematician or a political scientist.
reply
But you are projecting your situation onto others. Using your example, I know many mathematicians who are software engineers. But I guess you can deny it. It is still true.
reply
I'm saying that "incorporating" economics into a program does not make those who finish it economists.
He's not a trained economist and he's not a professional economist. I'm not sure in what sense I'm supposed to think that he is an economist.
He seems like a political scientist or public policy expert who specializes on labor. That's a similar profession to labor economist, but it isn't the same thing.
reply
Agree to disagree. However, I now understand and respect that your position is personal.
reply
That's pretty dickish. You're normally more respectful than that. I'm telling you how someone from within the profession you're talking about thinks about its boundaries. I'm not sure why that's to be disregarded as "personal", rather than representative.
If you could show that he's either received formal economic training (not a masters degree that touches on economics) or has held a position as an economist, I would gladly admit to having been mistaken.
We can have different definitions here, but I'm not even sure what yours is. The reason there are separate departments for public policy and economics is because they are not the same thing, even if there's overlap and collaboration.
reply
I didn't mean that in any negative way. I thought I was stating an understanding of your perspective. Guess not.
Your argument fails the examples I have provided for engineering. I don't see the PhDs in Engineering who work with the PhDs saying they are not engineers.
This my perspective is different than yours, and I suppose your colleagues.
Your feeling disrespected is on you. Why do you think that was rude? I think because you are personalizing. I could be incorrect and not disrespectful.
reply
My bad if I misinterpreted your intent. If I did, then you're right that it's on me.
Like I said before, I wasn't expecting this conversation to take on the depth that it did. Who is or is not a member of a particular specialty is not always clearcut. You can be one without formal credentials and you could have the credentials without being one.
My first approximation of a definition is that you either have the training or do the work. Neither of those criteria are perfectly clean and they differ by discipline. Few engineers have PhD's and many work as engineers with Bachelors degrees. PhD economics training is very different from undergrad training, or even masters training, which is why there are very few economists who do not have PhD's in economics.
To my knowledge Reich has neither the formal training in economics that would be recognized in the profession, nor has he ever been employed as an economist.
Is there a more nuanced case that he's an economist by some other definition? Maybe. Like I said, I'm not that familiar with his work and I have yet to see such a case.