Comments on: Quelle Horreur

By: lemuel pitkin

lemuel pitkin — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:50:10 +0000

Believe it or not, the economics departments of most US universities are not bastions of left-wing thought. The curriculum runs from Smith to Ricardo to Hayek to Friedmann.

See, that’s not my impression at all. I think it’s exceedingly unlikely you would read Smith, Ricardo or Hayek in most American economics programs, any more than you would read the Principia in a physics program. If you put together a list of the 20 most frequently assigned writers in economics graduate programs, I doubt there’d be even one who wasn’t an academic economist born since 1900.

By: lolwut

lolwut — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:05:33 +0000

“Believe it or not, the economics departments of most US universities are not bastions of left-wing thought. The curriculum runs from Smith to Ricardo to Hayek to Friedmann, and you can achieve a Master’s degree in the subject without ever reading Marx, Keynes, or Galbraith, except in bits spoon-fed by the professor for the purpose of discrediting them, along with counter-arguments to be used if the student ever finds himself in a debate with the enemy.”

If a course covers Ricardo or Smith, then it will almost certainly cover Marx and Keynes as well. And Hayek is much less likely to feature in the curriculum than any of the other economists.

By: a very public sociologist

a very public sociologist — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:44:29 +0000

Re: wider social sciences, if France and Germany are so much crapper than the anglophone countries in this regard, then why do so many sociology courses revolve around French and German thinkers?

By: a very public sociologist

a very public sociologist — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:43:07 +0000

Re: wider social sciences, if France and Germany are so much crapper than the anglo-phone countries in this regard, then why do so many sociology courses revolve around French and German thinkers?

By: Xboy

Xboy — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 04:06:16 +0000

Believe it or not, the economics departments of most US universities are not bastions of left-wing thought. The curriculum runs from Smith to Ricardo to Hayek to Friedmann, and you can achieve a Master’s degree in the subject without ever reading Marx, Keynes, or Galbraith, except in bits spoon-fed by the professor for the purpose of discrediting them, along with counter-arguments to be used if the student ever finds himself in a debate with the enemy.

By: John Emerson

John Emerson — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:24:05 +0000

OT, but I’ve read that French math education at all levels is far superior to American, and that you can reasonably expect or at least hope for a relativelt high degree of math knowledge even among humanities majors.

By: Bob B

Bob B — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:37:14 +0000

“There are a lot of French traders on Wall Street and in the City – all trained in French schools (especially the Polytechnique).”

Quite so.

“The worldwide volume of foreign exchange trading is enormous, and it has ballooned in recent years. In April 1989 the average total value of foreign exchange trading was close to $600 billion per day, of which $184 billion were traded in London, $115 billion in New York, and $111 billion in Tokyo. Fifteen years later, in April 2004, the daily global value of foreign exchange trading had jumped to around $1.9 trillion, of which $753 billion were traded daily in London, $461 billion in New York, and $199 billion in Tokyo.”
Krugman and Obstfeld: International Economics (2006) p.311

“The City of London is globalisation in action. It is, first of all, thoroughly international, handling more of the world’s deals in over-the-counter derivatives, global foreign equities, eurobonds and foreign exchange than any other financial centre (see chart 3). Second, its firms specialise in innovative, high-value-added products. Third, the City is living proof that clusters work in the way that economists claim. Capital can move like mercury. The main reason why international finance has made London its home is that everyone is there, making it easier to do complicated deals and to trade quickly in large quantities. The City offers a cluster of talent—financial whizz-kids, lawyers and due-diligence accountants—that is second to none, and self-renewing. It helps that English is a near-universal second language and that London’s time zone makes it possible to trade in a (long) working day with both Asia and America. Regulation is mainly deft but not lax, and the taxman takes a hospitable view of foreigners’ personal earnings.”
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8582323

By: Linca

Linca — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:28:47 +0000

I don’t see how Chicago-style Economics is part of anything “remotely approximating decent social science”.

By: a

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:12:31 +0000

There are a lot of French traders on Wall Street and in the City – all trained in French schools (especially the Polytechnique).

By: Hidari

Hidari — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 20:30:05 +0000

“Upon reading the Economist piece, all I have to say is that they appear to believe that anything other than breathless Randian cheerleading for capitalism is “pseudoscience”.”

That’s ‘psuedoscience’ which is very different. “Pseudoscience” means, ‘an ideology or believe system that apes the appearance of science but has none of the intellectual rigour’. ‘Psuedoscience’ is ‘anything that doesn’t echo the beliefs of batshit crazy ultra-right wingers’.

Big difference.

By: Demosthenes

Demosthenes — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:50:40 +0000

Upon reading the Economist piece, all I have to say is that they appear to believe that anything other than breathless Randian cheerleading for capitalism is “pseudoscience”.

To update Whedon’s Firefly: “My days of not taking the Economist seriously are definitely reaching a middle”.

By: Random African

Random African — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:17:50 +0000

In french high schools, at least from what I remember, you don’t have economics-only courses. It’s economic and social science (which means sociology) by the same professor.
And that’s if you choose the economic and social science path. scientific and literary paths don’t have any economics (or sociology).

By: tom s.

tom s. — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:11:08 +0000

“Was this the “economics” education that was actually “social studies” education? Or was that the German textbook only?”

I agree with Grand Moff Texan – the shocked economists’ assumption that “economics” is synonymous with relevant social science is as telling as anything else in this debate.

By: Kunming-tse

Kunming-tse — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:31:51 +0000

Social studies education in those countries is positive and helpful, and encourages human cooperation, much like the “Humanitization” classes in Soviet schools were. One can Never, Never trust textbook criticism to be done by right-leaning anal ideologues with an agenda to promote the power of the militarists in charge…Newsweek journalists should leave education out of their spin cycle. Foreign Policy should be ashamed, probably already are by now.

By: Matthew Kuzma

Matthew Kuzma — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:22:52 +0000

On an unrelated subject with a similar theme, I’ve often thought the Eiffel Tower should be considered one of the great wonders of the world because it was built by people speaking French.

“How long should this girder be?”
“Four twenty and six!”