Sudden jump by economists

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

i think graham's point is that they have only become "experts" in the eyes of the left now that they (allegedly, according to the new stateman's interpretation of their comments) do not support the osborne deficit reduction plan. before that they were idiots who didn't know what they were talking about.

Mmmmmmm

chewmylegoff

StevieJ wrote: »

Mmmmmmm

well you can't have it both ways. either (i) they are idiots who don't know what they are talking about, and therefore whether they support osborne's deficit reduction plans is neither here not there because they are idiots, or (ii) they are clever economists who we should all listen to.

if the latter then doesn't it become more difficult to criticise the deficit reduction plans that the government has taken to date given that the "clever experts" previously agreed with those plans and are only now starting to disagree with them?

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

well you can't have it both ways. either (i) they are idiots who don't know what they are talking about, and therefore whether they support osborne's deficit reduction plans is neither here not there because they are idiots, or (ii) they are clever economists who we should all listen to.

if the latter then doesn't it become more difficult to criticise the deficit reduction plans that the government has taken to date given that the "clever experts" previously agreed with those plans and are only now starting to disagree with them?

You open with 25, I raise you 60 (in 2010).

A war of words has broken out among some of Britain's most respected economists over Conservative plans to begin cutting public spending immediately if they win the general election.
More than 60 academics have issued a rebuke to the claim by George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, that a consensus of economic experts supports his policie

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/18/spending-cuts-economists-deficit

chewmylegoff

StevieJ wrote: »

You open with 25, I raise you 60 (in 2010).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/feb/18/spending-cuts-economists-deficit

as i said above, you can usually find economists on both sides of the argument. i'm sure there are plenty of "prominent" economists who still believe that osborne is not cutting fast enough or far enough.

i'm not sure what this adds to the above though. what does the fact that 9 of the people who were idiots and wrong before now (allegedly, according to a left wing publication desperate to prove that the labour party were "right" (a revisionist position if even i saw one, given alaistair darling's spending plans set out before the 2010 election)) agree with the view previously expressed by the 60 above mean?

also, do we know what "the 60" think now?

basically i think this is all a load of hot air, and all economists should be rounded up and run off the top off a cliff.

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

as i said above, you can usually find economists on both sides of the argument. i'm sure there are plenty of "prominent" economists who still believe that osborne is not cutting fast enough or far enough.
.

I personally find them idiots for signing a letter, I don't know why they do it, come to think yes I do, they want to see their names in the limelight. The point is we may be in a worse position if the 60 had been listened to (although they perhaps 'more cannily' knew that they wouldn't be ).

note_2

haha, does anyone bother reading rubbish like this?

anyone can look wise with hindsight. and no-one can predict the future. but that doesnt stop numpties trying to do both.

i remember when fuel prices were really high before the oil prices crashed, you had numerous 'experts' advising us that the end of cheap fuel was over. a while later they were down to 85p / litre of something like that.

i could find hundreds of different articles from different 'economists' or 'experts' to back up any view on the economy i wanted...

StevieJ

note wrote: »

haha, does anyone bother reading rubbish like this?

anyone can look wise with hindsight. and no-one can predict the future. but that doesnt stop numpties trying to do both.

i remember when fuel prices were really high before the oil prices crashed, you had numerous 'experts' advising us that the end of cheap fuel was over. a while later they were down to 85p / litre of something like that.

i could find hundreds of different articles from different 'economists' or 'experts' to back up any view on the economy i wanted...

My fav was the Economist mag front page headline of 'Drowning in Oil' price going down to 5 dollars a barrel
http://www.economist.com/node/188131

note_2

great read mate

i've spoken to family about property prices and they all claim to be experts on the back of the property crash 'it was always going to happen' etc etc.

of course that wont stop other well educated people getting caught up in the hype of the next property bubble, probably me included!

thor

chewmylegoff wrote: »

i think graham's point is that they have only become "experts" in the eyes of the left now that they (allegedly, according to the new stateman's interpretation of their comments) do not support the osborne deficit reduction plan. before that they were idiots who didn't know what they were talking about.

Or how they have become buffoons in the eyes of the right now that they don't support CONdemn policies whereas before they were wise sages who knew labour had caused the worldwide recession.
Economics of course is a worthless subject and has zero science behind it and I bet economists can't believe their luck that they can make a living out of it. Also when it comes to predictions they have to constantly revise them until the date of the event they are predicting - How useless is that? As has been already mentioned it ends up being nothing but hindsight. I could do that with NO economics education.

KrytenIceCubeHead

note wrote: »

anyone can look wise with hindsight. and no-one can predict the future. but that doesnt stop numpties trying to do both.

SIVs, CDOs and CDS. They were all based on "predictions" n'est'ce pas?