An Edited Email To A Colleague

I might have been around Spanos for too long, but I have very little faith in the empirical side of economics. Levitt's article has been criticized. I am not smart enough to tell who is right. But I think it is a trivial debate. Statistics is (educated) guessing. Economic issues like abortion are too complicated to be modeled and empirically tested (especially with data limitations).

The economic idea that abortion leads to less crime, ceteris paribus, is more important than the statistics. It makes sense. The economic way of thinking, the search for unintended consequences, the skepticism, the rebellion against the status quo is what is important. The statistics can neither prove or disprove today's abortion effects on tomorrow's crime. The economic logic is what matters.

I like what Levitt is doing. Tim Harford is doing similar things. We have to take economics to the marks (public). We have to write readable books. We have to introduce the public to the economic way of thinking. We have to study everyday issues and present our findings in an accessible way.

I am not a big fan of the apolitical economist. Of course, I think all economists should be libertarians. Abortion is a private choice. Government has no role in it. You can run as many statistical models as you want, but you're not going to change the fact that a woman who gets an abortion does not interfere with others rights. There is no public good argument. Costs are internalized. It is her decision not 500 white men in Washington. The majority's perceived moral superiority is not protected by the Constitution.

After meeting with the (professor) candidates the last few weeks, my impression is that economics is applied statistics. Economists are smart guys using complicated tools to make trivial conclusions. Very few are dealing with the fundamental economic problem of creating wealth (utility). They are not making the world a better place. Most economists are just keeping themselves fed. They are doing what others are doing. They are publishing meaningless papers in journals that no one reads.

I have no idea how the economic profession can be changed. I have no idea of what I am going to do. But the discussion of what economists should do must take place.