back2basics
3rd November 2009, 05:02 AM
I have to say I have never studied the subject, I know most people would describe it as an art and not a science.
First we had Michael Waldman an apparently well thought of economist, who concluded that Autism was caused by watching TV.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1548682,00.html
Then we have SuperFreakanomics, which has me questioning the validity of Freakanomics.
I also know that these are the utter failures and I am not including the vast majority of successful transactions, but very few economists saw the financial crash coming.
Don't these two events and the financial crash show us that economists are not only too confident of their craft, they are also oblivious of its limitations? Was it complacency or over confidence in the system that caused these utter failures?
First we had Michael Waldman an apparently well thought of economist, who concluded that Autism was caused by watching TV.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1548682,00.html
Then we have SuperFreakanomics, which has me questioning the validity of Freakanomics.
I also know that these are the utter failures and I am not including the vast majority of successful transactions, but very few economists saw the financial crash coming.
Don't these two events and the financial crash show us that economists are not only too confident of their craft, they are also oblivious of its limitations? Was it complacency or over confidence in the system that caused these utter failures?