Where Economists Agree

Still, 25% disagree. That's a lot of economists.

If economists were actually given power, there's a good chance they would cease to agree so much as they become much less impartial because of people becoming economists with the intent of being politicians.

Would probably be an improvement, but remember: Galbraith was also an AEA member.

There is an important purpose served in requiring experts to get enough popular support for their grand schemes before they are implemented. Really, I may agree with 95% of the big ideas to come from a majority of the AEA, but until you guys can compete with Lou Dobbs for the minds of Americans, there's no point in having you lead. You'll just have good ideas picked apart by someone louder and more convincing.

Where are the celebrities or politicians extolling the virtues of free trade or of WalMart? Every loudmouth with an axe to grind (Lou Dobbs, Al Franken, James Webb) has some academic researcher backing him up. Why can't a majority of the AEA find loudmouths to popularize the good ideas?

And the 75% who think the retirement age should be raised, well, maybe it should be, but it is not needed unless the economy severely slows down permanently and immigration crashes.

How many think currency pegs and monetary controls are barriers to trade? Ok, an inducement to unfree trade?

Would probably be an improvement, but remember: Galbraith was also an AEA member.

You really think he'd be worse than the guys in charge now?

regarding the Best Way to fix Social Security.

Only those who Agree or Strongly Agree to question 10 are invited to answer the following 4 Best Way questions.
So of the original 81 respondents 70 answer the next 4 Best Way questions: Agree/Strongly Agree
11: mandatory personal accts: 20/15.7
12: increase payroll taxes: 18.6/1.4
13: increase retirement age: 62.9/14.3
14: decrease benefits: 45.7/11.4

So... 42.8% express a Strongly Agree to 1 (or more) of the BEST WAY questions (should we assume that no one Strongly Agrees to 2 BEST ways?).

Very agreeable people

So everyone here would be perfectly fine with cutting social welfare, but what if we really wanted to solve the social security problem by cutting investment in our health care infrastructure? That's a welfare system. And, it does more evil by forcing us to live longer lives than it helps. Ah, but some economist just figured out that longer lives actually has economic value. If it has that much value, then social security is free.

But, death is clearly preferable to living in a world run by economists.

I am curious about Whaples' survey results on minimm wage law. To wit:

Table 3
Minimum Wage
The federal minimum wage in the U.S. should be:
a. eliminated. 46.8%
b. decreased. 1.3
c. kept at the current level. 14.3
d. increased by about 50 cents per hour. 5.2
e. increased by about $1 per hour. 15.6
f. increased by more than $1 per hour. 16.9

While it's no surprise that almost half think the minimum wage ought to be eliminated, I find it odd that over 35% prefer an increase. Clearly, the latter is the populist view, but I wonder how these professional economists who hold that view are explaining it to their Econ 101 classes?

BTW, I didn't see a link to the actual details paper. Can someone post it?