NormR wrote:Sorry for being a little flippant.
Not at all. I sometimes come across as quite pompous, and a little flippancy helps me come back to earth.
I was actually trying to get a little dis-confirming evidence of Keynesian economics rather than defend the egregious auto bailout.
There's a huge literature arguing about that. As far as I'm concerned, the most telling criticism of Keynesian economics is that it looks at the very short term, and ignores what happens after that. This may be a criticism of Keynes' disciples rather than of Keynes himself, but then he's the one who said: "In the long run we are all dead." Yes, yes, but what about five years from now?
I've been told that I should take macro economics more seriously whereas I'm inclined to write it off as largely useless / story telling.)
Would you agree, as a financial analyst, that you should understand the efficient markets hypothesis and CAPM before you can intelligently reject them?
As for macroeconomics, I'm a critic too. The main problem, as I see it, is that it's impossible to run controlled experiments (they sare possible in microeconomics), so macroeconomists have to make do with whatever data nature/humanity turns up. Unfortunately, it's rarely the data that one needs to test various models and theories. So some time in the 1980s many macroeconomists started using simulation models rather than models using real empirical data.
The field is wide open for new thinking, IMHO. But first it's wise to learn some of the conventional wisdom, if only to avoid others' mistakes. Send me a mailing address by PM and I'll send you a book or two.
The plural of anecdote is NOT data.