Even though Angry Bear has as an audience of people who are more than beginners in economic thought, I think it worthwhile to pursue basic stories about what we demand and value from our way of life, which includes the “economy”.
I had a recent experience where an acquaintance came up to me and asked about Angry Bear and then proceeded to explain what formed the basics of his economic narrative. In rough form and I think my summation accurate enough for casual conversation: Capital is like stocks, debt is like bonds, and rents are had by all…government (I think he meant taxes and ?), companies arbitage?, monopolies (profits and ?). He also asked who I read to get my information (I assume he was asking for a reference or two for Econ 202 information).
I actually wasn’t sure how to respond given his perceptions and also I wasn’t sure how great an interest he had in sorting out his stories or math on economics…I had mine, but there needs to be common ground somewhere. At least we had not begun with the tweet kind of economics spouted by political figures and slogans for PR campaigns. And he actually might be interested and willing to re-think basics. What might the format be to encourage him to be more thoughtful?
I think this worth pursuing beyond the tired story line of avoiding Uncle so and so at Thanksgiving dinner or the neighbor who has clearly and unequivocally bought into simple political memes. Barkley Rosser’s Could the US default due to a Complexity Catastrophe? offers another example.
Where does one begin with experience and smart people in one’s circles of activities?
How to think like and economist of that is what you wish by Brad DeLong
I have long had a “thinking like an economist” lecture in the can. But I very rarely give it. It seems to me that it is important stuff—that people really should know it before they begin studying economics, because it would make studying economics much easier. But it also seems to me—usually—that it is pointless to give it at the start of a course to newBs: they just won’t understand it. And it also seems to me—usually—that it is also pointless to give it to students at the end of their college years: they either understand it already, or it is too late.
By continuity that would seem to imply that there is an optimal point in the college curriculum to teach this stuff. But is that true?
What do you think?
(Dan here….also lifted from comments)