A very informative post from Barkley Rosser on the 16th. One can be too kind to rational expectations. It is a joke. The real issue is not that Lucas could come up with it, but why it was brought forth and multiplied, as it were, like a very poor B-grade biblical movie. WHole books on this junk? There is an undoubted idealist component of the theory of macroeconomic policy, which deserves much criticism. But the answer is to move full scale to a genre on the politics of economic policy. [I tried to do my personal bit some years ago in a piece on the politics of the so-called 'Keynesian' era, but couldn't get it published anywhere, so gave up.] Rat Ex moves in the oppositive direction. Merely acts to reinforce general equilibrium hegemony. As for Lindbeck, I noticed, all the way across the seas, the ideological significance of the AEA session to which Rosser refers, printed in the May 1995 P&P of the AER. THis is an integral part of the 'get the European [corporatist] model'. Discredit the opposition. Mancur Olson's The Rise and Decline of Nations is one of the bibles of this troop. And what a shocking book it is. History as written by someone raised in a profession with a complete disregard for history. 1945 Germany as the ideal environment - no incrustations of human excescence (read civilisation). No monopoly rents (supposedly). No nothing. Scorched earth. Start from scratch adn build the ideal unencumbered market economy. Also relevant is that The Economist (the City of LOndon's propaganda rag) is a major ideological player in the 'get Europe' game. But after all, as nasty as is Lindbeck, the cetnre of all this reactionary nonsense resides in the US, and the economics profession bears a major responsbiility. Can you people arrange an export embargo on US economics textbooks in order to stop the rot spreading? Evan Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED]
