pull down to refresh
There's a deeper darker answer that I increasingly think plays a large roll. Oftentimes, academic economists are the only people who actually believe the regime's propaganda. They're clever enough to concoct fancy rationale's for policies that are obviously cynical to everyone else.
That role, giving intellectual cover to corrupt politicians, I believe is why our profession is so well funded by the state. There's no mystery in the lack of funding for free market economists.
They're clever enough to concoct fancy rationale's for policies that are obviously cynical to everyone else.
So true. And oftentimes, the more fanciful you get the more academic success you get since only “novel” results are publishable. I could bitch about our profession all day lol
I could bitch about our profession all day lol
Me too, and yet I still think it's one of the better academic disciplines.
Agreed. Still the most honest and rigorous among the social sciences. Not sure how it compares to history though
History departments are terrible and one sided
I think their issue is not operating out of a theoretical framework. They think that let's them be objective, but it actually leads to defaulting to whatever the prevailing propaganda version of events was.
I don't have a great feel for that, personally. However, I've certainly heard historians like Tom Woods and Thaddeus Russel bemoan the plight of their profession.
Reminds me of the story about your daughter arguing against rent control and she couldn’t find any experts who oppose it
Not rent control, actually. Forgot if I misspoke. It was more so the concept of public housing that she couldn’t find much articles against.
Rent control is actually something even mainstream economists oppose
Have you ever played the "Bomb Damage or Rent Control" game with your students?
It's pretty fun.
No. I don’t think I’ve heard of that but I think I know what it is lol
IIRC, it's something Walter Williams came up with. I tried it with an intro class and we had some dark fun with it.
Public housing has a terrible record since 1965
I mean, most academic economists these days are democrats and default to believing that the government can solve most problems.
@Undisciplined and I have discussed this before, that the way Econ is taught biases the student towards government intervention because market failures and the corresponding “benevolent social planner” solutions are taught, but incentive problems within the government are usually ignored