Revitalizing Economics After the Crash

Signatures 2336 total

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 47 › »

1. 101
   Name: Carlos Arriaga on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments: Sometimes economists forget that economics is a social science... and they are too much seduced to find a very lovely equilibrium as people and the world were modeled by the hands of the economists...

   Flag
2. 102
   Name: Steve Fleetwood on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
3. 103
   Name: Jerry Evensky on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments: Adam Smith would agree.

   Flag
4. 104
   Name: Maria Floro on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
5. 105
   Name: Charles K. Wilber on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 106
   Name: Beatrice Boulu on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
7. 107
   Name: Norbert Reuter on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
8. 108
   Name: Christopher Cramer on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
9. 109
   Name: Paulette Olson on Sep 11, 2009

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 110
    Name: Esther-Mirjam Sent on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
11. 111
    Name: Charles Patrick Rock on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: nice going Geoff....I thought the perfect rationalists would retreat and hunker down for longer...but in America (the land of second chances) they are as crazy as ever, only stunned for months, not even years! cheers

    Flag
12. 112
    Name: Anis Chowdhury on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: There is another reason why economists have a romanticized and sanitized vision of the economy and come up with policy prescription so removed from the reality. They are not accountable; they do not lose jobs, instead they move on and even promoted for coming up with nice neat theories with mathematical elegance. Make them accountable, they will see the reality.

    Flag
13. 113
    Name: Romar Correa on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: The critique is not fundamental. The profession has paid heed to irrationality and herd behaviour. Indeed, all the finance theorems lambasted are known, even by their most enthusiatic exponents, to hold in the breach. The problem is that they are regarded as benchmarks. The answer, then, must lie in jettisoning the guideposts. Only abandoning the general equlibrium model as a tool to understand reality will do.

    Flag
14. 114
    Name: Ugo Pagano on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
15. 115
    Name: Raul Espejo on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
16. 116
    Name: Basilia Aguirre on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 117
    Name: Evgeny Popov on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: I agree with this petition

    Flag
18. 118
    Name: Hofmeier, Rolf on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 119
    Name: Claes Andersson on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
20. 120
    Name: William Waller on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
21. 121
    Name: Marion Blute on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
22. 122
    Name: Angelo Gasparre on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
23. 123
    Name: JC Spender on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
24. 124
    Name: Michael H. Belzer on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
25. 125
    Name: Russell Smith on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
26. 126
    Name: Mohamed El-Hodiri on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: Our loyalty should be, exclusively, to the economy specific phenomena, and not to the tools we use to study them. If the existing mathematics does not fit the economy, then we should declare the problem unsolved and request NEW mathematics from mathematicians.

    Flag
27. 127
    Name: Jesse Dorey-Ferrera on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
28. 128
    Name: Swyngedouw Erik on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
29. 129
    Name: G Gallo on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
30. 130
    Name: John A. Miller on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
31. 131
    Name: William Milberg on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
32. 132
    Name: Valentin Lazea on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: Krugman is certainly right about the idealized theoretical framework in which economists have found complacency. However, I have three important addenda to make: -one major cause of the failure was the belief that economics can be turned into a branch of mathematics, ie the pretense that economics can be a "hard" science; -another major mistake (to which Krugman is no stranger) was to turn economics into a servant of political decision, emphasizing utilitarism over morality; -third, as economists, we should all accept the blame with humility, and not to point our fingers to other colleagues, even if we disaproved them in the first place.

    Flag
33. 133
    Name: Anonymous on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
34. 134
    Name: Christopher Gunn on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
35. 135
    Name: Rossitsa Rangelova on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
36. 136
    Name: Sidney Plotkin on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
37. 137
    Name: Pritam Singh on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
38. 138
    Name: Johannes Schiller on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
39. 139
    Name: Van Griethuysen Pascal on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
40. 140
    Name: Fabio Sabatini on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
41. 141
    Name: Simon Wolf on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments: What remains to say: Economics and economists should learn to accept the limits of economic thinking and modeling. Complex challenges, like climate change, sometimes require reflections and answers that go beyond economic terms, and forcing problems into the narrow corset of economic world views threatens to neglect important, but non-economic perspectives!

    Flag
42. 142
    Name: Jean-Guy Loranger on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
43. 143
    Name: John Gowdy on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
44. 144
    Name: Ellen Webbink on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
45. 145
    Name: Schuerz Martin on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
46. 146
    Name: Robert Rowthorn on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
47. 147
    Name: VERLEY Patrick on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
48. 148
    Name: Helena Lopes on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
49. 149
    Name: David L. Harvey on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag
50. 150
    Name: Rudiger L Von Arnim on Sep 11, 2009

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: « ‹ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ... 47 › »