“Life expectancy rose for the wealthiest 20% of Americans between 1980-2010. Over same three decades life expectancy declined for the poorest 20%. Shockingly, the difference in avg life expectancy btwn poor and wealthy women widened from 3.9 years to 13.6”
Life expectancy in the US has dropped 3 years in a row (unprecedented) & is the worst of all 36 countries. Nice that put it on the economists, but it's really a self-inflicted deep wound
In the mid-1950s, the leadership of the Federal Reserve included bankers, lawyers and an Iowa hog farmer -- and not a single economist. But a revolution was coming... Read my essay adapted from my forthcoming book, The Economists' Hour
I literally don’t know an economist who thinks you should “turn a blind eye to inequality”. via ⁦
This opinion by can be read two ways, depending on what we take for “economist”. Is it economist advisors or policymakers, chosen by politicians? Maybe a case there. Economists more generally, including academics? Makes zero sense to me.
Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In This book appears to argue that Milton Friedman's ideas caused our current economic challenges. This is an interesting claim that I reject. During my time at , I was taught that human capital is the key. 1/2
„Life expectancy rose for the wealthiest 20 percent of Americans between 1980 and 2010... declined for the poorest 20 percent of Americans. Shockingly, the difference... between poor and wealthy women widened from 3.9 years to 13.6 years.“
Counterpoint: Poverty is at an all-time low, hourly pay at the 20th percentile and median are at all-time highs, household income at the 20th percentile and median is at an all-time high, & alleged negative effects of inequality are unproven.
Actually, we need way more of this kind of economics thinking: "Economists even persuaded policymakers to assign a dollar value to human life — around $10 million in 2019 — to assess whether regulations were worthwhile."
What an interesting way to see what economists did between 1969 and 2008. HT
I am of two minds about this piece by . I think some of my fellow economists protest too much. There is a history. At the same time, the effect of economics is probably less than suggested by this piece.
Another straw man attack on economics, who very much focus on inequality but also understand the value of markets. And silly empiricism. (Two things happened simultaneously, hence A caused B.) Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
A thoughtful column. What kind of expert does our society need today?
Seems deeply disingenuous that (rightly) criticizes *some* economists for placing too much faith in the unfettered power of markets while conveniently omitting the fact that the research on inequality he cites was also done *by economists*
Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
Hey Siri, show me today’s most ludicrous straw man. “Sure! I found this in the New York Times: ‘It’s time to discard the judgment of economists that society should turn a blind eye to inequality.’”
True story for those who liked 's article complaining about economists valuing GDP growth over limiting inequality: according to the CBO, the Gang of 8 amnesty bill would have increased GDP and inequality.
"The rise of economics is a primary reason for the rise of inequality." Yes, but (a) the fault lies with a certain kind of economics, and (b) Paul Volcker was skeptical of economics and insistent on public values. Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
The claim by Applebaum that "The rise of economics is a primary reason for the rise of inequality" demonstrates precisely why one needs economics
"Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In." Which economists? ignores the many economists who argued against, or qualified, these views. And the key question is begging: why did politicians listen to one side so much more? Blame the politicians.
Not to say that we economists are blameless, but this opinion article is 25 years behind: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In If you're an economist reading this, you'll need a stiff drink or do your meditation before.
“Willful indifference to the distribution of prosperity over the last half century is an important reason the very survival of liberal democracy is now being tested by nationalist demagogues.” Smart piece by Binyamin Appelbaum.
"a growing body of research shows that those born at the bottom today have less chance than in earlier generations to achieve prosperity" Yes, but much of it is research *in economics*.
Doorgeslagen marktdenken en de schade van het neoliberalisme wordt nu zelfs in Amerika aan de kaak gesteld: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In
If this article was called “Blame Macroeconomists in conservative governments for the Mess We’re In” I could see the point. As it is written, it is just non-sense the idea that economists do not care about inequality
Average life expectancy gap between poor and wealthy women widened from 3.9 years to 13.6 years, 1980-2010. Wow. In our society of inequality and inequity, the price of being on the losing side is a whole decade of life. Wow. h/t
Here’s a novel concept. Blame the economists
Fascinating history and important insights from .
"The rise of economics is a primary reason for the rise of inequality."
Markets are constructed by people, for purposes chosen by people; people can change the rules. It’s time to discard the judgment of economists that society should turn a blind eye to inequality. Reducing inequality must be a primary goal of public policy.
#ucrpbpl004 #ethics #PublicPolicy
“President Franklin Delano Roosevelt dismissed John Maynard Keynes, the most important economist of his generation, as an impractical 'mathematician'.” FDR may have dismissed Keynes the man but he zealously adopted Keynesian economics.
seeing many economists dunk on piece: ... not fond of title but has reminded me several times not to blame byline for the title, usually an editor ...
“Reducing inequality should be a primary goal of public policy”. Well said ⁦
Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In, by Binyamin Appelbaum /