Eh?

Experts have a very clear role in society: I hope no one would suggest otherwise. But I have a real problem with the suggestion that elites are experts. And as far as I can see being a banker, or being an economist, is not a qualification for having expertise in making the political judgement on the stimulus or otherwise needed to direct an economy, which is always a political choice.

A banker or economist knows less than a votestealer spending to regain election?

I am entirely willing to accept empirical evidence, within the boundaries within which the research took place. Extrapolation beyond those boundaries is always dangerous. It is my contention that the pre-2008 economy has gone for good: there will be no return to the old ‘normal’. Most informed opinion seems to think we will face perpetual low-interest rates.

“Informed” is carrying a lot of weight there, no? For anyone who says otherwise is “uninformed,” obviously, eh?

I will be sharing my opinions with my correspondent.

Goodoh

10 comments on “Eh?

  1. I am entirely willing to accept empirical evidence

    The empirical evidence suggests otherwise…

  2. “the pre-2008 economy has gone for good”

    Which means he doesn’t have to bother reading or understanding anything from before then. That’s pretty much the whole study of economics and tax wiped out. His ignorance can start again from Year Zero.

  3. I am entirely willing to accept empirical evidence

    I am entirely willing to ignore empirical evidence

    FIFY

  4. The vast majority of the world lives in countries where the interest rate exceeds 3%. Is that empirical enough?

  5. One presumes the opinion is informed by the study of his own turds for shape & colour, in the customary manner?

  6. “the pre-2008 economy is gone for good” – since this was based on a pyramid of lies perpetrated by GB (fake figures for RPI hence fake figures for real economic growth, fake figures for bank loan losses, hence fake figures for bank profits, hence fake figures for GDP and, separately, for budget deficits, fake figures for immigration so fake figures for population hence fake figures for GDP/head) Murphy is talking about the smoke hiding an illusion blowing away.

  7. Could he recognise empirical evidence if it was laid out for?

    I suspect in his Humpty Dumpty world, empirical evidence is defined as evidence which supports whichever theory he’s fixated on today.

  8. Since we’re on the subject of the great thunderous tuber…

    Blackadder: I thought it was common maritime practice to have a crew?

    Captain Rum: Opinion is divided on the matter. I says it isn’t, everyone else says it is.

  9. The unspoken implication is that it takes a *political* economist to decide on stimulus. I wonder if he has one in mind.

  10. I am entirely willing to accept empirical evidence, within the boundaries within which the research took place.
    Extrapolation beyond those boundaries is always dangerous.

    Genuine LOL.

Leave a Reply

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