Can't really argue with that. Too bad economists argue like surveyors.Economics marries a predilection for personal freedom with a longstanding tendency to view the interests of the government as being distinct from the welfare of the people. Adam Smith’s “Wealth of Nations,” modern economics’ founding document, emphasized that point.In the 18th century, it seemed clear that what was good for King George III was not necessarily good for Britain and certainly was not necessarily good for his American subjects.
Democratic revolutions muddied the waters and made it possible for some to think that the government was a faultless servant of the people’s will, but a healthy skepticism about the benevolence (and competence) of the state continued within economics.
Both markets and governments are quite imperfect, and it is important to weigh their failures against each other.
The world isn’t and shouldn’t be run by economists — many perspectives need to be at the table. But economists have plenty to add: formal models, statistical evidence, a focus on freedom and a sophisticated centuries-old approach to public policy.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
What Economics Brings to the Table
Edward Glaeser, highlighting what he sees as the role of economists, as he finishes his stint blogging at Economix (via Mark Thoma):
Labels:
Civil society,
general economy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment