Sunday, October 29, 2006
Macroeconomics in one word is "DECEPTIVE".
It's draws you in with fancy undergrad texts like the one's by Fischer and Mankiw.. an dyou think, out of the lot, Macro prob has most relevance to reality.
But then you learn more and you learn that while it may still be relevant, it's a long way off to get there. Modelling reality on a large scale must not be underestimated, as I have foolishly done.
Bad enough we had to deal with seven schools of thought, as Phelps put it:
1)Keynes
2)Monetarist-Friedman
3)New classical-Samuelson and Phelps(this guy is apparently dicey..bounces from one to the other as and when convenient- in one word-"practical")
4) the New Keynesian(Mankiw et al. ..sigh!)
5)Supply side stuff
6)Neo Neo Classical RBC
7)the structuralists
and each one put it's own spin to data..
The Neo neo classical currently incorporates a little bit of everything..and is being used as a placatory school of thought. But one knows, somebody out there is coming up with the Neo Neo Keynesian...I can't wait, Really.
It's draws you in with fancy undergrad texts like the one's by Fischer and Mankiw.. an dyou think, out of the lot, Macro prob has most relevance to reality.
But then you learn more and you learn that while it may still be relevant, it's a long way off to get there. Modelling reality on a large scale must not be underestimated, as I have foolishly done.
Bad enough we had to deal with seven schools of thought, as Phelps put it:
1)Keynes
2)Monetarist-Friedman
3)New classical-Samuelson and Phelps(this guy is apparently dicey..bounces from one to the other as and when convenient- in one word-"practical")
4) the New Keynesian(Mankiw et al. ..sigh!)
5)Supply side stuff
6)Neo Neo Classical RBC
7)the structuralists
and each one put it's own spin to data..
The Neo neo classical currently incorporates a little bit of everything..and is being used as a placatory school of thought. But one knows, somebody out there is coming up with the Neo Neo Keynesian...I can't wait, Really.