“There has never been a famine in a functioning multiparty democracy.”
—Amartya Sen
[“Functioning” is doing a lot of work here, but I still think this is an interesting point to consider re: “Murderous Misallocations of Resources”.]
After publishing last week’s essay on economics, I got a few responses in my inbox that were so good, I felt compelled to elaborate on my replies and combine them into a follow-up essay. The comments below are grossly paraphrased versions of those texts and emails; the originals were all very kind and funny, but I’ve distorted and/or exaggerated them to make for a better dialogue.
Why should we trust economists if they’re still overwhelmingly white & male? And aren’t some of them STILL using math to pass off their opinions as facts?
—Darrick Hamilton
We shouldn’t! And yes, they are!! You should absolutely not trust all economists, nor any single economist all of the time. Just like our economy has become over-financialized, the field of economic study has been dramatically over-mathematized in the past ~70 years. Shitty economists have polluted the field with cherry-picked data & misleading graphs, which they claim can be used to predict the future (spoilers: they can’t). And just like in any scientific field, even the “good” economists are often way off base on individual issues [looking at you, Krugman].
Economics is not a “hard” science in the ways that physics or chemistry are, and anyone who pretends as much should be laughed out of the room. Perhaps someday, with hitherto uninvented data gathering & analysis techniques, we could create perfectly objective and rigorous methods for economic study, but we are nowhere close to that world today.
Econ should instead be thought of as a “framework of understanding” [ty JM for lending me this phrase]. It’s a way of thinking about the world. As such, we should treat all mathematical economic models (and their resultant policy proposals) with a healthy dose of suspicion—especially models that we are told “explain everything” or could “solve all our problems” if only they were heeded.
I recommend thinking of economics much like you would psychology or nutrition—there’s a never-ending fountain of bullshit theories and crackpot doctors springing forth from those fields as well, but your understanding of human life and wellbeing would be badly crippled if you put blinders on and ignored them entirely.
Isn’t it reductive (and a bit heartless) to view everything in our world—trees, mountains, animals, works of art or science—as mere “resources”?
—Mariana Mazzucato
Yes! It is absolutely reductive. But reducing some things into simpler terms can help us think more clearly about them, and make better decisions, faster. Take nutrition again—nutrition is SO fucking complicated. Even the “macronutrients” that you see on food labels like protein and carbs are abstractions for much more complex collections of amino acids and other organic compounds.
If we spent all our days trying to total up our aminos acids and balancing our Omega-3-and-6 fatty acids, we’d be wasting precious time could be used to smoke weed and play videogames, or do literally anything else. To use some more econ vocab: the “opportunity cost” is too high. It’s more expedient and practical to remember simple rules, like “eat more fish and avocados lmao”.
Not everything should be thought of in economic terms. You can’t quantify a parent’s love for their child (and even if somehow you could, it would be dreadful manners publish your findings). But many important things—healthcare, education, housing, energy—can and must be studied with an economic lens, if we’re to have a shred of hope of improving their quality & accessibility.
Economics is just astrology for nerds.
—Amartya Sen
LOL, I don’t entirely disagree!
Econ is like astrology in that astrology is just another framework for understanding. While I’ve never been a “user”, neither would I deny the potential value of horoscopes. Like BuzzFeed quizzes or Harry Potter Houses, I think they’re an effective playground for introspection. They help us interrogate our feelings, goals, and relationships, and give us a fun structure for sharing hidden aspects of our lives with one another.
Economics helps us interrogate life on a broader scale: society, politics, or our personal/business finances when necessary. You may not find it “fun” like I do, but your understanding of our shared sociopolitical reality will be much poorer if you ignore it entirely—just like your understanding of yourself will be poorer if you never develop some kind of introspective practice. That could be therapy, meditation, astrology, journaling, or something else—but you should choose something! [Not saying these things are all mutual equivalents; maybe don’t use astrology as a substitute for therapy lol.]
Like I said before, economists are terrible fortune tellers. That’s not what economics is good for! Any economist who makes an ultra-confident prediction of an upcoming recession or the short-term trajectory of stock prices is almost certainly full of shit. Similarly, a psychologist can’t tell you whether your marriage is going to fall apart in 20 years (nor can an astrologer, for that matter). Econ, psych, nutrition, etc: studying these things helps us make decisions in the present, not to reliably predict the future.
That’s all for now. Thanks for the lovely & thought-provoking responses <3