Silver is quick with a methodogical explanation for this "counterintuitive" finding:
One can find room to criticize the composition of the Journal's panel: it probably does not contain enough liberal economists, and almost certainly does not contain enough what you might call nontraditional economists -- behaviorists or mathematicians or people that think, quote-unquote, "outside the box". Nevertheless, this represents quite a large difference of opinion with the Intrade forecast.No, who would have believed it? Not enough liberals in the economics professoriate? And worse! Not enough "quants" thinking "outside of the box"! Geez, what's wrong with the American academy? Where's Paul Krugman when you need him?!!
Well, I guess we can add one more example to my paper, "'Depression Fetishism' All the Rage."
Nate Silver's on board the 1930s Depression Economics Express! More cowbell (infrastructure)!
7 comments:
I agree with The Other McCain's analysis about the coming socialist economic policies. IT WON'T WORK! But, conservatives and Republicans have to talk and deal with what DOES work. Tax cuts, smaller government and less regulation. Even one Bill Clinton recognized that. But it took the Republicans gaining control of congress. BTW, liberal economist is an oxymoron. And emphazize MORON!
Thanks Mark!
Yeah, Righty64, I guess those morons include Robert Reich, John Kenneth Galbraith and Keynes himself for that matter. Maybe with your supreme economic knowledge you should have gone to work for the Bushies. Then, liberal economics wouldn't look so appealing to most of the citizens of this country.
Admittedly, Clinton had a Republican Congress to work with, but so did Bush for 6 years. How did that work out?
Oh, and is misspelling emphasize part of the moron joke? I don't get it.
DLB, you said it, not I! Oh, sorry, next time I will use the spell check just for you! And, I have not been a defender of the Bush economic policies, especially the last two years.
I have not been a defender of the Bush economic policies, especially the last two years.
How convenient! So, maybe you think conservative economists are morons, as well.
DLB, Bush is not an economic conservative; it's just that those on the right who have carried his water and would say so have been absolute pussies for the last eight years. The rats are abandoning the ship, as always.
And Righty64, It's called spell check. It's not a hike into the Andes; it's a button you press. Don't get all butt-hurt when you fail to do so. It's merely a sign of an educated mind. Avail yourself of the technology.
JBW, I'm with you there on the politics of Bush economic policy. I guess the MBA didn't help. I think it may be neoconservative economics as described by Cheney when he said deficits don't matter. Same as neoconservative foreign policy, send in American troops and they'll be greeted with flowers and Bob's your uncle. A lot of wishful thinking is involved.
Re the spelling thing. I don't understand needing spellcheck for words any middle school student should be able to spell correctly without breaking a sweat. I'm afraid on the whole moron issue that Righty64 may be projecting a bit. I'm sure he thinks if we put The Other McCain in charge of economic policy we'd be running Clinton-like surpluses in no time.
Post a Comment