Saltwater Versus Freshwater Economists

For a discipline that has ridden high in the last two decades, I think that the recent financial crisis and subsequent economic recession will leave economists of all kinds with lots of explanation to do. For one, the state of affairs makes it clear that the confidence that professional macro economists have had was largely undeserved. More pertinently, though, the state of affairs in the US and Europe have led to the need to re-examine the theories that have informed most economic explanations at the macro economy.

Coming back to one of its most lucid writers, Paul Krugman revisits the ideological arguments in the discipline generally and especially in macroeconomics. because the story is worth reading for itself and I am not as competent in explaining macroeconomics, I do not attempt to summarize it. However, it clearly states the fair point that the major assumptions of rationality by the discipline are not tenable any longer. It is clear now that the hasty dismissal of Keynesian understanding was premature and the resurgence of this alternative is almost guaranteed. With credit to Paul Krugman, he does not push the Keynesian alternative too far but has concentrated the essay in demonstrating that its; explanation of recessions and the prescriptions for going over them is more complete and demonstrably effective.

As he says, the search for a more complete theory of macroeconomics is on but I would wager that there are already careers invested in one approach. this means that irrespective of the merits or demerits of the Neoclassical approach, the success of the administration in restoring market activities will not be as easy to concede. It is also clear to me as a student of economics that the rigour of economics must require proper models but more importantly, the difficult math must yield sensible results. The absolute rationality of all financial market participants is not one of them and thankfully, markets do not demand rationality from all.