On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Doug Pensinger<brig...@zo.com> wrote:
> If he was the only one saying that there was a problem you might have > a point, but as the vast majority of economists said that there was a > huge problem Economists are no better at predicting the future than anyone else. How many economists do you know that got rich investing? The vast majority of economists do no better than average at investing. Of course economists like to persuade others that they can predict the future better than non-economists, and then to claim that they can fix things when they go wrong. That makes them look good, feel good, like they are vitally needed and are helping people. More importantly, they get more prestigious jobs by persuading others that they have the magic touch. If economists were so capable of making things better, then the reasonable and scientific thing to do would have been to not act immediately, to observe scientifically, to see if things were really going as bad as some claimed. If they had done that, then there would be evidence whether their predictions of doom were true, and then the politicians and economists could spring into action and fix things. The problem is, if they did that, people would realize that economists' predictions are no better than a coin-flip. Why risk their reputation on that? _______________________________________________ http://mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l_mccmedia.com
