Economic Talk

One of the main reasons I hate discussions about the economy is that it is always framed in much the way this Instapundit post is:

“Is there a disaster looming?”

First, we can insert the widespread agreement that no economists ever agree on anything (insert the Truman’s one-armed economist quip here).

Second- Didn’t we just spend an entire election campaign in which one part spent all their time and energy convincing us the economy already is a disaster?

At any rate, why is the question never framed the other way- Is there a period of economic bliss around the corner? For once, I would like to hear what is going right.

Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
Share On Google Plus
Share On Pinterest
Share On Reddit






3 replies
  1. 1
    Kimmitt says:

    By the bye, the quote is Truman’s not LBJ’s. Not that it matters.

    Anyway, the macroeconomic profession generally sees “disaster avoidance” as its raison d’etre. Mostly because disasters tend to do more damage in less time than slow and steady improvements in economic conditions do good.

  2. 2
    Loyal Opposition says:

    First, we can insert the widespread agreement that no economists ever agree on anything.

    Actually, Milton Friedman wrote, in one of the books he authored, that economists of all stripes agree on much. It’s just that the disagreements get all the reportage.

  3. 3
    Kimmitt says:

    I’m not familiar with that quote, but I’m very surprised by it. Milton Friedman was generally opposed by either a majority or a vocal minority of economists in nearly everything he discussed.

Comments are closed.