Why economists are always right… or wrong

Oliver Woods has used Matt’s post on the trade off between equity and efficiency to launch an attack on the separation between normative and positive economics. Matt’s busy with real economics today so it falls to me to defend his honour. Oliver claims that

…any ‘rational’ observer would see that economics and politics/society/morality are fundamentally intertwined. They’re really more or less the same thing…

There’s a very good reason why economics and politics are entirely different beasts: economists can be right (or wrong), but politicians can never be right. Read more

RBA lifts rates to 7.25%

Yesterday the Reserve Bank of Australia lifted their official cash rate to 7.25%, only 100 basis points off the New Zealand rate. The accompanying statement is here.

I’m still unsure about how to read these new RBA statements – they are a little less focused than the RBNZ ones, often trying to focus on as many issues as possible.

The bit I look out for is when they say “a significant slowing in demand from its pace of last year is likely to be necessary to reduce inflation over time”. This implies to me that they might lift again soon.

However, they said this in both statements.  The best comparison comes from looking at the last paragraph in both statements:

Read more

Auckland airport – what’s the issue?

So the government has announced changes that have been pushed through parliament in order to ensure that “ministers will be able to block the sale overseas of any land or assets if it runs counter to the need to maintain New Zealand control of strategically important infrastructure on sensitive land“.

Now I’m not an expert on why or how we should maintain New Zealand control of strategically important infrastructure. Around the blogsphere, I see some people arguing against this proposal (here, here, here, and here) and people arguing for it (here and here). From all our special conversations about positive and normative economics we know that we cannot make a definitive conclusion with making some value judgments – however that shouldn’t stop me from describing some of the things I believe are pretty close to facts about this policy.

Read more

Marshall’s maths

Bluematter quotes Alfred Marshall:

(1) Use mathematics as shorthand language, rather than as an engine of inquiry. (2) Keep to them till you have done. (3) Translate into English. (4) Then illustrate by examples that are important in real life (5) Burn the mathematics. (6) If you can’t succeed in 4, burn 3. This I do often.

It seems to me to be fairly good advice, but Bluematter’s not convinced that either the maths or the real world examples are useful! Let’s examine a real world example to illustrate the issue. Read more

The luxury of cheese: A reply

There was an article in the Dominion post by Linley Boniface. In the article she talk about how cheese used to be a staple, and now it is a luxury.

Now I find I don’t need to argue with her, as she practically makes her own case against herself in the second paragraph, namely:

Bikes were always second-hand, a new coat was a purchase that needed to be weighed up for months in advance, and meals in restaurants were for birthdays only. When I think back to my childhood, the only thing I can remember being given access to in unlimited abundance was cheese.

So she is saying that people can now afford bikes, new clothes, meals in restaurants etc but not cheese.  The reason for this is that we are trading with countries that make these things more relatively more efficiently than we do, it’s called comparative advantage .  I’m willing to pay a higher price of cheese for the lower price of goods such as TVs, cars, computers etc, but then again I don’t like cheese 😉

She also levels the claim that we aren’t hearing enough about the issue (which by itself is a lie – there are several articles a week on it) because it is the poor that are suffering.  However, aren’t the poor gaining from access to ridiculously cheap manufactured goods (washing machines, clothes, shoes, TVs).  If they are actually net losers from trade out there, then why don’t we compensate them (akin to Kaldor-Hicks) – wait a second we do with the level we set welfare payments.

Goalkeepers and rationality

At Stumbling and Mumbling the author is discussing why goalkeepers don’t maximise their chance of making a save from a penalty kick. According to this paper they only stood still during a penalty kick 6.3% of the time, even though 28.7% of kicks were down the middle.

Mr Mumbling puts forward three reasons why the goalkeeper may stand still less than is optimal:

  1. It puts pressure on the striker in some way,
  2. It is a social norm – way of minimising regret (as a dive looks cooler than standing still),
  3. Goalkeepers also value not getting yelled at, it is less likely people will make fun of you if you miss a penalty kick when diving than when you miss the kick when not moving.

These are all good reasons which probably explain the phenomenon, however I have a couple of other ideas:

Read more