Partisan economics
The problem is not that Mr Krugman questions the consensus on trade (if indeed he does), or that Mr Barro questions the consensus on fiscal policy (as he certainly does). It is that both set the consensus aside so carelessly. In doing so, these stars of the profession destroy the credibility of their own discipline. Mr Krugman gives liberals the economics they want. Mr Barro gives conservatives the same service. They narrow or deny the common ground. Why does this matter? Because the views of readers inclined to one side or the other are further polarised; and in the middle, those of no decided allegiance conclude that economics is bunk.
This gives voice to my recent concern, i.e. that I do not trust anyone no matter how credentialed to provide sound, scientific economic analysis. I don’t have really any greater formal training in the hard sciences than I do in econ, so why is it so much harder to separate out the junk?
