About finehoe


23 threads
Followed by 0
Following 0
Ignored by 0
Ignoring 0
Ignore finehoe
In United States
Registered Sep 24, 2009

finehoe's most recent comments:

  • On Thu, 26 Mar 2015, 7:02am PDT in Watch an extremely liberal member of Congress try to park a car, finehoe said:

    Norton isn't on the DC Council, she is the District's non-voting delegate to Congress.

  • On Mon, 23 Mar 2015, 5:04pm PDT in It's Pinch your nose and talk like a NPR know it all windbag day., finehoe said:

    "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative."

    - John Stuart Mill

  • On Tue, 17 Mar 2015, 6:16am PDT in Mish is right (ouch, hurts to say that)., finehoe said:

    [quote]Didn’t policymakers get it all wrong? Haven’t the academic economists been squabbling nonstop?

    Well, as a card-carrying economist I disavow any responsibility for Rick Santelli and Larry Kudlow; I similarly declare that Paul Ryan and Olli Rehn aren’t my fault. As for the economists’ disputes, well, let me get to that in a bit.

    I stand by my claim, however. The basic macroeconomic framework that we all should have turned to, the framework that is still there in most textbooks, performed spectacularly well: it made strong predictions that people who didn’t know that framework found completely implausible, and those predictions were vindicated. And the framework in question – basically John Hicks’s interpretation of John Maynard Keynes – was very much the natural way to think about the issues facing advanced countries after 2008. The sad thing, of course, is that this incredibly successful analysis didn’t have much favorable impact on actual policy. Mainly that’s because the Very Serious People are too serious to play around with little models; they prefer to rely on their sense of what markets demand, which they continue to consider infallible despite having been wrong about everything. But it also didn’t help that so many economists also rejected what should have been obvious.

    Why? Many never learned simple macro models – if it doesn’t involve microfoundations and rational expectations, preferably with difficult math, it must be nonsense. (Curiously, economists in that camp have also proved extremely prone to basic errors of logic, probably because they have never learned to work through simple stories.) Others, for what looks like political reasons, seemed determined to come up with some reason, any reason, to be against expansionary monetary and fiscal policy.

    But that’s their problem. From where I sit, the past six years have been hugely reassuring from an intellectual point of view. The basic model works; we really do know what we’re talking about. [/quote]


home   top   questions or suggestions? write p@patrick.net