Grand Game time, folks! James Livingston, "economic historian" at Rutgers, goes off in the Obama Admin Daily Newsletter:
As an economic historian who has been studying American capitalism for 35 years, I'm going to let you in on the best-kept secret of the last century: private investment - that is, using business profits to increase productivity and output - doesn't actually drive economic growth. Consumer debt and government spending do. Private investment isn't even necessary to promote growth...A big part of the problem is that we doubt the moral worth of consumer culture...Consumer spending is not only the key to economic recovery in the short term; it's also necessary for balanced growth in the long term. If our goal is to repair our damaged economy, we should bank on consumer culture - and that entails a redistribution of income away from profits toward wages, enabled by tax policy and enforced by government spending.
I wonder if he wrote that on his government-invented iPad? F*****g idiot. He apparently thinks that if you write about stuff you don't understand, that makes you an "economic" historian. Yes, sure, I'm a snob. But the guy has a PhD in History from Northern Illinois U. A two-time loser.*
Please do share your thoughts....
(Nod to Kevin Lewis, who as always is in no way complicit with my surly "analysis"; he just sent the link)
*A clarification: Northern Illinois has a number of quite good departments, including econ. But the history department is a doctrinaire marxist ideological chop shop.
As an economic historian who has been studying American capitalism for 35 years, I'm going to let you in on the best-kept secret of the last century: private investment - that is, using business profits to increase productivity and output - doesn't actually drive economic growth. Consumer debt and government spending do. Private investment isn't even necessary to promote growth...A big part of the problem is that we doubt the moral worth of consumer culture...Consumer spending is not only the key to economic recovery in the short term; it's also necessary for balanced growth in the long term. If our goal is to repair our damaged economy, we should bank on consumer culture - and that entails a redistribution of income away from profits toward wages, enabled by tax policy and enforced by government spending.
I wonder if he wrote that on his government-invented iPad? F*****g idiot. He apparently thinks that if you write about stuff you don't understand, that makes you an "economic" historian. Yes, sure, I'm a snob. But the guy has a PhD in History from Northern Illinois U. A two-time loser.*
Please do share your thoughts....
(Nod to Kevin Lewis, who as always is in no way complicit with my surly "analysis"; he just sent the link)
*A clarification: Northern Illinois has a number of quite good departments, including econ. But the history department is a doctrinaire marxist ideological chop shop.
9 comments:
inre the "economic historian" claim
I think we can replace the word "economic" with "parsimonious" wlog.
G
Don Doudreaux sent a letter to the NYT addressing Livingston's drivel.
http://cafehayek.com/2011/10/vulgar-keynesianism-on-steroids.html
Oooops, Boudreaux
Personally, I think he can be wrong without going on a sanctimonious rant about historians. Especially as an economist who teachings in a goddamn political science department.
"who teachings", O, canada!
Livingston isn't much of a historian either. Looking at historical reality, regardless of one's understanding of economics, couldn't lead to these types of conclusions.
A historian, at the very least, would provide relevant qualitative data backing up his unfounded position. This dude doesn't even do that. He just makes bold claims against conventional wisdom without offering any type of evidence or explanation.
Friggin' Marxist
I agree the historian's account is rubbish, but I don't think it would be any more correct if the guy had a PhD in economics from Stanford. When the analysis is so lamentable, there's no need to attack credentials.
Yes, Kevin, it's called a typo.
Post a Comment