[PEN-L:29544] Re: economists

[Eugene Coyle <eugenecoyle@xxxxxxx>]

Jim, I certainly agree with your last sentence.  The function of the
neo-classical micro, and the Chicago sub-set, is exactly to serve the purpose
of the business types.  They need that story to train the press, politicians,
opinion leaders.  The economists' job is to tell the story.

    Here are a paragraph from Wendell Berry and a paragraph from me from a forthcoming publication:
 

> This idea of a global "free market" economy, despite its obvious moral flaws and its dangerous practical weaknesses,

> is now the ruling orthodoxy of the age. Its propaganda is subscribed to and distributed by most political leaders,

>  editorial writers, and other "opinion makers.  ? Wendell Berry
>
>         Economists produce the propaganda Wendell Berry decries.  Like "The Shadow" in the old radio drama,

>  economists have the power to cloud mens' minds.  Prestigious universities, more powerful than radioactive spiders,

>  harbor a corrupted discipline in the service of greed.

Gene
 

"Devine, James" wrote:

 

[was: RE: [PEN-L:29531] Re: RE: Liu on Stiglitz]

Gene writes:>I also disaggre w/Jim's assesment of economists.  I see few "seeking truth" and way over 99% Pleasing the Boss. <

I hope I didn't give the impression that it was a significant number of economists who had a worthwhile understanding of the world. I do think that a lot "seek the truth" but find it in mysticism, e.g., the holy cult of the Invisible Hand or the worship of mathematics for its own sake. This may "please the boss" objectively, but it's not the same as being a technocrat. Indeed, I am told that business types love the "Chicago school" vision of economics because of its rah-rah pro-Market stuff, but that they find its details just as irrelevant to their concerns as the most abstract Gerard Debreu-type stuff.

JD