I once called myself an economist – it was something graduates of 1960’s British Universities did then. It was sufficiently unusual to be worn as a mark of distinction. However I can remember only the following lessons from my four years engrossed in economics books -
- the strictness of the various preconditions which governed the idea of (perfect) competition – making it a highly improbable occurrence;
- the questionable nature of the of notion of “profit-maximisation”;
- the belief (thanks to the writings of James Burnham and Tony Crosland) that management (not ownership) was the all- important factor
- trust (thanks to Keynes whose work was dinned into me) in the ability of government to deal with such things as “exuberant expectations”
- the realization (through the report of the 1959 Radcliffe Commission) that cash was but a small part of money supply. Financial economics was in its infancy then and debt - household and country – had not become the problem it now is.
By the mid 1970s I had seen the error of my ways and moved, somewhat unsuccesfully, into the field of “political science” (the penis envy of real science was already evident). By the 1980s we had all fallen - hook, line and sinker - for the new economic religion. When I first came to Romania in the early 90s, I was amazed at the number of “economists” I came across – for them it meant no more than an “accountant”!
This blog has been very critical of the economic profession – only economists like Steve Keen, Mark Blyth, Yanis Varoufakis and Dani Rodrik have managed to escape its ire, although it has recognised the stirrings in the new millenium of remorse for its erstwhile arrogance. What most economists have a temperamental disinclination to discuss is...POWER – which even this little overview ignores.
This fantastic article offers a very useful discussion of the sort of criticism economics has received in the past decade or so - setting it against some alternative models.
A couple of economists have just come out into the open about the subject - “Power and Progress – our struggle over technology and prosperity” by Daren Acemoglu and Simon Johnson comes in at a whopping 550 pages. Acemoglu is a developmental economist from Turkey who has published, with political scientist James Robinson, “Why Nations Fail” (570 pp 2012) and “The Narrow Corridor – states, societies and the state of liberty” (800pp 2019)
I mention the number of pages simply because I have an ongoing campaign against long-winded authors and have appealed to publishers and writers alike to exercise more discipline before they inflict yet another title on the poor reader. The reviews are interesting although I think Acemoglu would have been better advised to continue his partnership with a political scientist. I think I will wait for a graphic version.
Reviews and interviews
https://cepr.org/system/files/2023-06/Power_and_progress.pdf interview
Institutions and Growth Acemoglu, Johnson and Robinson 2004
No comments:
Post a Comment