And this is not surprising. Because macro, most especially in its general equilibrium form, does not ‘do money’
It appears the Egregious Professor has never heard of “monetarism.”
And this is not surprising. Because macro, most especially in its general equilibrium form, does not ‘do money’
It appears the Egregious Professor has never heard of “monetarism.”
How would he know, given his frequent boasts about not having read his text books?
Is there any comparable figure, past or present, who makes such blithe pronunciamientos so completely at odds with the facts? It’s the sheer brio with which he fires out this bullshit that astounds.
Would he pass the first year economics exams that his students sit?
Would he pass the second year exams? The third year exams? The Masters exams? Would he pass PhD qualifying exams (in the US context)?
As an expert (not just self-described either but employed as such) I wonder which of those he thinks he would pass.
@MyBurningEars
Spud would pass any economics exam he set as he would set them based on the only economics that matter. His own.
Nor would it matter if he forgot tomorrow what he taught today as what he wrote on the day of the exam would be right even if it completely contradicted what he had said the day before the exam.
Candidly Murphy could give a long list of reasons why your comment is obviously trolling.
But he has a life. As demonstrated by him spending his 60th birthday at an obscure conference surrounded by people he hardly knew.