[governance] [Dewayne-Net] REINHART AND ROGOFF: 'Full Stop,' We Made A Microsoft Excel Blunder In Our Debt Study, And It Makes A Difference

[David Conrad]

Michael,

On Apr 17, 2013, at 4:03 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> Economists of course, are split on the "scientific" validity of their work
> especially as it interfaces with the real/policy world

Well, no.  As far as I can tell Economists, by and large, weren't split: the vast majority considered the correlations R&R drew tenuous at best.  It was politicians, policy makers, and pundits that used the R&R paper as a justification for positions they already held to the exclusion of evidence and arguments to the contrary (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias).  

> and the above should
> if nothing else, suggest modesty and caution before we go around flaunting
> and drawing policy directions from the supposed "scientific" validity of
> this or that set of observations or conclusions.

Actually, I'd argue basing policy direction on _scientifically valid_ observations and conclusions (which wasn't done for policies based on the R&R paper) is far better than alternatives such as anecdotes, appeals to emotion, over generalizations, accusations of hubris, etc. 

Regards,
-drc


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t