And where was the economics prize that might have gone to someone suggesting we might just need to change the way we manage resources if we are to survive? There wasn’t one, because the whole theme was that we definitely didn’t want to upset the status quo.
Pity The Sage has missed that they’ve already given the Big One, the Nobel, to the bloke who has already told us that. William Nordhaus and let’s have a carbon tax. And the subsidiary one, the peerage, to Nick Stern for saying the same thing.
You know, the solution that The Sage can’t bear to accept. Largely, one assumes, because the solution doesn’t emanate from The Sage.
The impression one gains from the media here in Oz is that ScoMo intends to go to this Glasgow conference and commit us to turning off the air conditioning.
This seems to me to be quite a risky action. While there’s certainly plenty of idiots in Oz who’d vote to go back to the horse and cart, none of them vote Liberal (or National.) He just scraped in last time because the louts of Labour were drooling at the thought of greenifying us all (well they did get to covidise us instead.)
But if he actually gets back in I’m wondering whether he’ll try a carbon tax. All I’m sure of is that it won’t work and that the Left will scream for him to steal more and more loot to lavish on them.
Largely, one assumes, because the solution doesn’t emanate from The Sage.
And because it doesn’t require a jackboot to the neck. Nothing wakes up Murphy’s three incher like the thought of compelling people to do what he thinks is right.
Ironically, one of the prizewinners was the guy who produced that paper that purported to show that raising minimum wage levels had no negative impact on employment. You would think that Capt Potato would enjoy trumpeting this, even though it has been refuted. Does Wrong-Lewis still report the original result? It’s a long time since I last went to his blog for amusement
Indeed, Diogenes. What are we to make of David Card’s Nobel? Are the Committee mad, or is there more to his research than is apparent?
The Nobel wasn’t for the minimum wage work. Which has been shown to be wrong in fact.
Partly it was because Card, when it was shown to be wrong, went, hmm, you know, you might be right there?
But much, much, more it was because of the technique being pioneered. Detailed empirical work using natural experiments to be able to tease out proper relationships between variables. It wasn’t for the subject at all, but for the approach and techniques.
Can’t say I’m particularly onside about handing out of prizes to economists. Prison sentences maybe. The odd death penalty
I’m not convinced that it is a prize that should be handed out for ingenuity, when his most famous paper was falsified.