It’s a pretty simple concept that very few politicians seem to be able to understand.
Good economists vs bad economists
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
I take it he was an amputee. Unable to say, “But, on the other hand…”
LikeLiked by 1 person
What are the exceptions to considering both the intended results and the unintended consequences in making a decision?
LikeLike
Too obscure, I was. It’s a reference to a remark made by some king/president who said if he ever found a one-handed economist, he’d hire him. I’ll look around to see if I can find the cite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Clever, but knowing what you don’t know is one of the true signs of wisdom.
LikeLike
Faster than I thought. Truman.
LikeLike
It hung on the wall of a buddy of mine when he chaired the Econ Department.
He said it was a constant reminder to all of his colleagues and often commented that it needed to be branded on more than a few of their foreheads.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“ Are natural or manmade disasters good for the economy?”
His implication is that we revel in disasters so some economists say “let’s have more”. I would say that the comments are more about the human tendency to find a silver lining.
Plus disasters are a fact of life, good or bad though they might be for certain sectors such as home builders, lumber, roofing, trash haulers, etc.
I notice he did slam the regime for lying about tariffs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The point it that those boons to the builders and suppliers come at the expense of someone else. The money that buys a new roof cannot buy a new car for the homeowner or some other good or service.
LikeLike
Got that. And I would say that most economists agree, if not all agree with that premise.
Just because PPE distributors, vaccine makers, disinfectant products and Zoom are reaping record sales doesn’t mean the pandemic is good for us either.
Got that too. As do most economists.
Williams was beating a dead horse, IMO.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And yet, Krugman told us 9/11 was a boon to the economy,
And most importantly, our congress, with the guidance of the Congressional Budget Office, passes law every year totally oblivious to that principle.
Every tie you hear the words ‘green jobs’ that principle is being ignored.
LikeLike
According to Williams, Krugman said:
“Ghastly as it may seem to say this, the terror attack — like the original day of infamy, which brought an end to the Great Depression — could do some economic good.”
He did not say it would be a boon to the economy.
Military spending went up. Real estate deals and investment in NYC went up. Construction contracts went out. Dump truck companies did well hauling debris.
“…some economic good…”. Yeah, that fits.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: ““…some economic good…”. Yeah, that fits.”
That’s the very mistake Williams (and Bastiat) warn against. That is, if there is “some good” (seen), but greater bad (unseen), then there is on net a good deficit.
LikeLike
You too? Krugman, and others, did not suggest we create disasters to boost the economy. They merely voiced the obvious fact that some economic gains can happen. And they do until people get back on their feet again.
You are trying to attack setting “policy by disaster”.
LikeLike