SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Mason Gaffney <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 15 Jan 2010 20:25:31 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Reply-To:
Societies for the History of Economics <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
Alas, no, my intended meaning was the opposite. We should have more history,
but enough wisdom to see that Coase's theorem is not worth our time. However
I take your point that to understand or at least appreciate the degradation
of recent economics to serve as the handmaiden of polluting interests we
should be aware of the ease with which Coase turned so many of our
colleagues.

Ray Marshall was once Secy of Labor under LBJ.  Here is his judgment: "We
soon  discovered ...  the danger of allowing economic policy to be dominated
by business or financial interests or, which usually comes to the same
thing, orthodox economic analysis."

You can hardly imagine a modern cabinet member saying anything like that:
not because economic analysis has changed much, but politics has.

Mason Gaffney

ATOM RSS1 RSS2