Sunday, March 15, 2009

Romer: More of the same?

So, I just started in on a Christina Romer paper, and I read:
"This paper argues that there may in fact be a very important link between the stock market crash and the acceleration of the decline in real output in late 1929 and throughout much of 1930."
No kidding. You don't say. Are there really people out there arguing otherwise? Of course, economists never cease to disappoint me. Just when I start to feel that my opinion of the profession couldn't get any worse, I read some new whopper coming out of Cambridge or Hyde Park, like the theory that the Great Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression are unrelated events, or that the current increase in unemployment is caused by a contraction in labor supply...


  1. You seem like you have common sense....why are you in an economics program again?

    There is better stuff coming out of the post-Keynesian school - the one that doesn't think that all of the world can be boiled down to 'efficiency' in markets (e.g. the world isn't solved like an algebraic equation).

    I'd be interested to hear what you'd like to see taught as economics. I happen to like a book like Jonathan Kirshner's Currency and Coercion (an IR book, but an IR book that deals with the real world and the economy, at the same time!), but I'm also interested in Joan Robinson's work, among others. Besides that, economics students should be forced to be traders for a year as a class so that they are forced to better understand how markets work (or don't work) or don't make sense so easily.

  2. This papers is very interesting, but it has a bad composing. I would recommend to use some wrtiting advices, for example -
    you can check this article, and make it work for yourself!