@richardjmurphy and economics: never the twain shall meet

He\’s having a go at the FT\’s economics editor now.

Oh dear: there’s a believer in the confidence fairy at large, which is unsurprising given that Giles is yet another of the ex Institute for Fiscal Studies, BBC cohort who have done so much the spread neoliberal dogma through the media.

No doubt Giles was educated in the era when Keynes fell off the economics curriculum. No doubt he believes as a result that economics always achieves equilibrium and the unemployed are only so because they don’t want to work, and so don’t matter, because that’s what this school thinks despite all the evidence to the contrary (but then evidence is something they’re really rather good at ignoring; dogma is all that matters).

And it\’s a particular joy for two reasons.

The first is that it is, I am absolutely certain, impossible to study economics in the UK, and has been impossible for 50 years, without being taught Keynes.

But the second is better: it\’s this:

when Keynes fell off the economics curriculum. No doubt he believes as a result that economics always achieves equilibrium

Keynes himself thought that an economy would reach equilibrium. In fact this was his point, that there were several possible equilibrium states. And what he wanted to make sure was that the equilibrium reached was the one that included full employment rather than one of the several other possible equilibriums which did not.

In fact, Keynesian equilibrium is a rather important part of Keynesian economics. In fact, if you don\’t believe in equilibrium it is pretty much impossble for you to believe the rest of Keynesian economics.

Ritchie simply doesn\’t understand the subject well enough to realise when he\’s spouting bollocks.

 

11 comments on “@richardjmurphy and economics: never the twain shall meet

  1. God it’s so dispiriting.

    One might of thought that the mountain of garbage he spouts would one day undermine his credibility but there is no sign of this happening.

    Here he makes a number of claims about what Giles believes that I am quite sure are wrong. But it doesn’t matter.

    I’ve said it before but I’ll say it again, truth and falsehood are irrelevant for bullshitters:

    http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html

  2. Happy days. Murphy goes off his trolley again. He must have bunked his economics class (did he even take one?) if he makes statements like that.

    My favorite is his concept of law. It is even further detached from reality than his ideas on economics. I don’t think he quite understands the sovereignty of each country. He says he does, but in reality he is no where close. You can just sense that he is desperate to blurt out that all countries should do as he says. Which sounds like the oppressive governments of an imperialist age. That’s what Murphy’s problem is. He is actually a communist from the 19th century re-incarnated.

  3. “Ritchie simply doesn’t understand the subject well enough to realise when he’s spouting bollocks.”

    And this is what gets me down the most: evidently neither do the people who choose to publish his warblings. Why oh why can’t we have a better left-wing?

    [actually we do have a very good moderate left wing paper – The FT ]

  4. “Ritchie simply doesn’t understand the subject well enough to realise when he’s spouting bollocks.”

    Nonsense. He’s fully aware of the fact that most of what he says is untrue. He just doesn’t care. Facts never trouble bigots or cranks, and Ritchie is both.

  5. I think when Gordon Brown declared the end of boom & bust was that he actually believed that we had reached Keynesian equilibrium.

  6. You are all far too hard on Ritchie. He’s got a book to sell. and there’s no such thing as bad publicity. however, no publicity at all is a different kettle of fish…..

  7. Luis Enrique

    We also have a very good left-wing blogger in the excellent Chris Dillow. In fact if you combine Chris and the FT you have a fairly formidable left-wing economics team. Murphy is redundant.

  8. Where’s Arnald when you need him to back up Murphy’s claims?

    Oh, he’s gone at the door with his coat has he, not backing up his stupid, shoot himself in the foot friend this time?

  9. Murph accusing someone else of being a believer in the confidence fairy? That’s the pot calling the kettle noir, that is.

    So why are more of the left-wing papers listed on the stock exchange than the right-wing ones? (Only the — shudders — Mail is listed from the right, but the Mirror and [allegedly] the FT on the left.)

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.