It's dismal mostly because politics is intertwined and economists get jobs at secondary and tertiary teaching institutions by aligning themselves with political parties. Hijacked by politicians is the real problem.
Most of the things said in this presentation about the proper way of thinking about economics are also true of physics. The quality of a reductionist model is given by it's simplicity, and it's predictive power, or should I said domain of relevance, but it is a relative measure : it should be dumped only if another model of similar or lesser complexity is able to consistently provide better predictions. Classical physics have not been dumped by general relativity : because it is far simpler, it is still immensely useful, but Descartes model of gravitation has been forgotten because Newton's model got better predictions.. Complexity should not be avoided at all cost though. Getting more accurate and complex models can give a better understanding of the limits of the previous ones : thanks to ondulatory theories of light we know when and why ray theory of light will fail.
Could it simply be that the reason why economists can't predict anything about the economy is that their models and their ability to pick said models is completely wrong. That their underlying assumptions about how humans behave is simply a bit of metaphysics without any physical meaning. Economics may simply be the respectable form of fortune telling, tea leaf reading, and or reading the future in the intestines of animals.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
My favorite professor. I am honored to be his student.
Would u please tell me how can be his student,
Thanks
@@emilyzhang8390 get admitted to Harvard Kennedy school of government
thanks lse for your ongoing cooperation . great job
It's dismal mostly because politics is intertwined and economists get jobs at secondary and tertiary teaching institutions by aligning themselves with political parties. Hijacked by politicians is the real problem.
Most of the things said in this presentation about the proper way of thinking about economics are also true of physics. The quality of a reductionist model is given by it's simplicity, and it's predictive power, or should I said domain of relevance, but it is a relative measure : it should be dumped only if another model of similar or lesser complexity is able to consistently provide better predictions.
Classical physics have not been dumped by general relativity : because it is far simpler, it is still immensely useful, but Descartes model of gravitation has been forgotten because Newton's model got better predictions..
Complexity should not be avoided at all cost though. Getting more accurate and complex models can give a better understanding of the limits of the previous ones : thanks to ondulatory theories of light we know when and why ray theory of light will fail.
Very good comment.
Dani Rodrik we ecpect you in the Turkey neachts time.
Could it simply be that the reason why economists can't predict anything about the economy is that their models and their ability to pick said models is completely wrong. That their underlying assumptions about how humans behave is simply a bit of metaphysics without any physical meaning. Economics may simply be the respectable form of fortune telling, tea leaf reading, and or reading the future in the intestines of animals.
somehow you managed to miss every single word in the presentation
hi. can i have the text of this video. my english listenhng is not good.
Incredible. You did not get anything. You a the nightmare of every professor
😶😶😶🤡🤡🤡🎃🎃🎃