If Not Poverty, What is Economcs For?
“Poverty and economics, by Daniel Little: How important should the subject of
poverty be within the discipline of economics? Some economists appear to think
it is a very small issue compared to the magnificent mathematics of general
equilibrium theory. Others believe that economics should fundamentally be about
the sources of human well-being and misery, and that understanding poverty is
absolutely fundamental for economics. How should we try to sort this out?”
Comment
I read an
extract of Daniel Little’s argument on Mark Thoma’s
(Department of Economics
, University of Oregon) Blog Economist View HERE
The paragraph quoted above sets the tone for what follows and strikes a
chord with what I posted yesterday on neoclassical economics. Now while what economics can offer for
the debate on poverty is a worthwhile and appropriate subject for economists to
offer views; it does not follow that necessarily they have the answer.
Little shows that some neoclassical economists deny that poverty is an
appropriate subject for economists, which is controversial in itself. Follow
the link and make your own mind up about its appropriateness.
3 Comments:
Sure, one aspect of economics is to fight poverty. And for the most part it has.
airth
Agreed.
But the next step is to recognise that policies flowing from the poverty issue - - getting from a status quo towards change to address it -- is problematical and brings politics, both constitutional and, alas, ideological.
Much of the economics of say, the Gary Becker kind, addresses the economic consequences of the problems/behaviours, and such like, which are not about causes of the initial problem/behaviour.
These last are the fundamental problems to be addressed.
Fires are put out by water but water availability does not address the cause of a fire, only it spreading.
Gavin
Gavin,.
I really never understood the difference between Economics and Political Economics until now. Economics, fundamentally, is not interested in combating poverty. Political Economics is.
I am thinking of the Islam/Arab world where Political Economics has never been practiced. Poverty is a major issue there. And this is a major reason for the social upheaval and turmoil that exists there today. If political parties existed and had had a roll in fashioning economic policy in Egypt and Syria, then, I suggest, the unprecedented turmoil that exists there today would not exist.
Post a Comment
<< Home