October 11, 2009
Britain's Central Planning Death Panels
October 11, 2009
Free Market M.D.
October 11, 2009
Economies of Scale in Compliance
October 11, 2009
Balan's Challenge
October 10, 2009
The Pleasure of Telling Others What to Do
October 10, 2009
Gonick the Great - and How He Could Have Been Greater
October 9, 2009
More Scott Sumner
October 9, 2009
Not From The Onion
October 9, 2009
Thoughts on a Second Stimulus


Thanks for the link to arjounals. I started reading “The state of Macro” by Olivier Blanchard. In his conclusion he notes,
“A macroeconomic article today often follows strict, haiku-like rules. It starts from a general equilibrium structure, in which individuals maximize the expected present value of utility, firms maximize their value, and markets clear. Then, it introduces a twist, be it an imperfection or the closing of a particular set of markets, and works out the general equilibrium implications. It then performs a numerical simulation based on calibration, showing that the model performs well. It ends with a welfare assessment.”
I think this nicely highlights the central problem with economics as currently practiced. The assumption of a welfare assessment is a necessary one to be rewarded by the institutions that really care about economics namely the state and the institutions that support the state, special interest groups, lobbyists, universities etc. I think that in a truly free market, the study of economics would look more like philosophy. Financial engineering would fill the gap for math weenies… ; )