----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
Yuval Yonay wrote: (where MS=mainstream) "Given the allocation of resource 
(financial resources, public attention, prestige and political connections) 
between MS economics and all other views and approaches, it is obvious that 
the impact of MS economics is much greater than that of others, not because 
it is better science but due to this allocation." 
 
This is perhaps a candid admission of the kind of feeling many heterodox 
economists might share.  I believe however that it is not equally obvious 
to many that the mainstream's strength lies in its ability to put its 
analysis in crisp and tractable formal models. I have found it impossible 
to keep reading long literary discussions on institutional issues that do 
not seem to give any clue to tractable concepts. 
 
My point is that without tractable models, the argument is not compelling. 
Public attention is hard to draw unless one has a crisp and clear message. 
I do not see anybody overthrowing the mainstream without providing formal 
models. 
 
Mohammad Gani 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]