What is the most important lesson you learned from "When the Facts Change"? Pick one sentence that reflects the wisdom of this article and reflect on it in light of what you have learned about Marx.

Transcribed Image Text:

14 Leaders ity as a foreign vice. Some even claim that there are no gay people From Iran to Uganda, autocrats often caricature homosexual in their country. In such places the most effective campaigner are, therefore, local gay people. The best thing liberals elsewhere I can do is to provide financial and legal support to gay-right groups and grant asylum to those who flee persecution. ►riot; to the uninformed, it sounded like a firm of architects. In 2002 about half of Americans said they tolerated homosex- uality; now nearly three-quarters do. One study found that sup- port for same-sex marriage increased rapidly in 2006-10 among Americans with a gay or lesbian friend, but fell among those with none. Even in countries where a majority remains hostile, change is coming. The proportion of Indians who said that gay people should be accepted rose from 15% in 2013 to 37% last year. Though an attempt to overturn Kenya's gay-sex ban failed last year, the publicity it generated persuaded more locals to come out. That helps explain why over the same period the share of other most places the young are more gay-friendly than the old, so dis- men only in one respect." The rest of those lights are coming on, Kenyans who tolerate homosexuality nearly doubled, to 14%. In ure of the newspaper photographs, a man differing from c one by one. crimination will surely dwindle as the prejudiced pass away. Mr Wildeblood's motivation for writing a book in 1955 in which Got to let it show The dismal yet flexible science When the facts change mer ger identify" as an economist. Among several flaws, the profes- sion fails to nurture the young, she argues, or listen to outsiders. A survey by the American Economic Association (AEA) found that only 31% of economists under the age of 44 felt valued with- in the discipline. All this must be off-putting to youngsters beginning the long (and lengthening) journey into the profession (see Finance sec- tion). They may wonder if there is room for their ideas in a dis- cipline that can seem hidebound, hierarchical and homogenous. Will they invigorate economics or will it indoctrinate them? Budding economists can draw comfort from our series of six economics briefs that begins this week. Each looks at an issue (competition policy, minimum wages, inflation, the dollar, cul- ture and public debt) that has prompted econo- mists to revisit their field's presumptions. Over the past decade or two, the profession has be- come more relaxed about minimum wages, in- flation and public debt; less relaxed about mo- nopoly power; less enamoured of flexible exchange rates; and more open to deep, institu- tional explanations of wealth and poverty. Economics sometimes changes its mind CONOMICS IS A "disgrace", according to Claudia Sahm, a for- has chosen to “no lon- tipping into a recession) provided the natural experiment re quired to change economists' minds about minimum wages. New facts, then, are more persuasive than new ideas. But al though an alternative theory is not a sufficient condition for a change of heart, it is often necessary. It takes a model to beat a model, as economists like to say. They sometimes cling to pro positions in defiance of the facts simply because they have noth ing better to replace them with. That raises a third condition for persuasiveness. To convert economists to your cause, it is not enough to give them some thing new to believe. You must also offer them something fruit- ful to do. Appeal to their hands as well as their heads. Economists will jump on a revolution that gives them new toys or techniques to play with. This may explain why they have become more en- thusiastic about institutional explanations of the wealth and poverty of nations. They cannot rerun history of sprinkle institutions randomly across countries to test their long-term effects. But they have found ingenious proxies for this kind of random variation. Economists, like many others, relish the chance to display their cleverness. New facts and clever techniques help shift economic opinion. Does this also require new economists? Not necessarily. Some big names have changed their minds, or at least their tone. Olivier Blan- chard is less fiscally cautious today than he was ten years ago as IMF chief economist, and Narayana Kocherlakota is much more doveish about monetary policy than when he was first appointed to head a Federal Reserve bank. The heretical tribes on the fringes of economics yearn to sack Rome. But it is more efficient to convert the emperor. Execu SEMPUT What does it take to change economists' minds? New ideas are not enough. The theory of monopsony, which explains why a minimum wage may help employment, not hurt it, had been around for at least 60 years before main- stream economics accepted its use in many low-wage labour markets. Recent nonchalance about high levels of public debt may seem new and mould-breaking. But the fresh thinking rests on theories set out in the 1950s and 1960s. New facts are more compelling. The persistence of low inter- It is nonetheless striking that, in several of the areas covered est rates despite high public debt has left an impression, as has by our series, vital work was done by economists who were in the pre-pandemic combination of low inflation and low unem- their 30s at the time (although all of them were already at elitei ployment. The dollar's rally in the global financial crisis show- stitutions). According to the AEA's survey, only 5% of economis cased its peculiar role in the international financial system, as aged under 44 feel they have a great deal of power within the d I have various emerging-market tantrums since. Fresh evidence cipline. But the young may have one power denied to their also matters in microeconomics. New Jersey's decision to raise ders: the freedom to imagine a future economics, unencu its wage floor in 1992 by more than neighbouring states (despite bered by too heavy an intellectual stake in its past. 14 Leaders ity as a foreign vice. Some even claim that there are no gay people From Iran to Uganda, autocrats often caricature homosexual in their country. In such places the most effective campaigner are, therefore, local gay people. The best thing liberals elsewhere I can do is to provide financial and legal support to gay-right groups and grant asylum to those who flee persecution. ►riot; to the uninformed, it sounded like a firm of architects. In 2002 about half of Americans said they tolerated homosex- uality; now nearly three-quarters do. One study found that sup- port for same-sex marriage increased rapidly in 2006-10 among Americans with a gay or lesbian friend, but fell among those with none. Even in countries where a majority remains hostile, change is coming. The proportion of Indians who said that gay people should be accepted rose from 15% in 2013 to 37% last year. Though an attempt to overturn Kenya's gay-sex ban failed last year, the publicity it generated persuaded more locals to come out. That helps explain why over the same period the share of other most places the young are more gay-friendly than the old, so dis- men only in one respect." The rest of those lights are coming on, Kenyans who tolerate homosexuality nearly doubled, to 14%. In ure of the newspaper photographs, a man differing from c one by one. crimination will surely dwindle as the prejudiced pass away. Mr Wildeblood's motivation for writing a book in 1955 in which Got to let it show The dismal yet flexible science When the facts change mer ger identify" as an economist. Among several flaws, the profes- sion fails to nurture the young, she argues, or listen to outsiders. A survey by the American Economic Association (AEA) found that only 31% of economists under the age of 44 felt valued with- in the discipline. All this must be off-putting to youngsters beginning the long (and lengthening) journey into the profession (see Finance sec- tion). They may wonder if there is room for their ideas in a dis- cipline that can seem hidebound, hierarchical and homogenous. Will they invigorate economics or will it indoctrinate them? Budding economists can draw comfort from our series of six economics briefs that begins this week. Each looks at an issue (competition policy, minimum wages, inflation, the dollar, cul- ture and public debt) that has prompted econo- mists to revisit their field's presumptions. Over the past decade or two, the profession has be- come more relaxed about minimum wages, in- flation and public debt; less relaxed about mo- nopoly power; less enamoured of flexible exchange rates; and more open to deep, institu- tional explanations of wealth and poverty. Economics sometimes changes its mind CONOMICS IS A "disgrace", according to Claudia Sahm, a for- has chosen to “no lon- tipping into a recession) provided the natural experiment re quired to change economists' minds about minimum wages. New facts, then, are more persuasive than new ideas. But al though an alternative theory is not a sufficient condition for a change of heart, it is often necessary. It takes a model to beat a model, as economists like to say. They sometimes cling to pro positions in defiance of the facts simply because they have noth ing better to replace them with. That raises a third condition for persuasiveness. To convert economists to your cause, it is not enough to give them some thing new to believe. You must also offer them something fruit- ful to do. Appeal to their hands as well as their heads. Economists will jump on a revolution that gives them new toys or techniques to play with. This may explain why they have become more en- thusiastic about institutional explanations of the wealth and poverty of nations. They cannot rerun history of sprinkle institutions randomly across countries to test their long-term effects. But they have found ingenious proxies for this kind of random variation. Economists, like many others, relish the chance to display their cleverness. New facts and clever techniques help shift economic opinion. Does this also require new economists? Not necessarily. Some big names have changed their minds, or at least their tone. Olivier Blan- chard is less fiscally cautious today than he was ten years ago as IMF chief economist, and Narayana Kocherlakota is much more doveish about monetary policy than when he was first appointed to head a Federal Reserve bank. The heretical tribes on the fringes of economics yearn to sack Rome. But it is more efficient to convert the emperor. Execu SEMPUT What does it take to change economists' minds? New ideas are not enough. The theory of monopsony, which explains why a minimum wage may help employment, not hurt it, had been around for at least 60 years before main- stream economics accepted its use in many low-wage labour markets. Recent nonchalance about high levels of public debt may seem new and mould-breaking. But the fresh thinking rests on theories set out in the 1950s and 1960s. New facts are more compelling. The persistence of low inter- It is nonetheless striking that, in several of the areas covered est rates despite high public debt has left an impression, as has by our series, vital work was done by economists who were in the pre-pandemic combination of low inflation and low unem- their 30s at the time (although all of them were already at elitei ployment. The dollar's rally in the global financial crisis show- stitutions). According to the AEA's survey, only 5% of economis cased its peculiar role in the international financial system, as aged under 44 feel they have a great deal of power within the d I have various emerging-market tantrums since. Fresh evidence cipline. But the young may have one power denied to their also matters in microeconomics. New Jersey's decision to raise ders: the freedom to imagine a future economics, unencu its wage floor in 1992 by more than neighbouring states (despite bered by too heavy an intellectual stake in its past.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

The most important lesson from When the Facts Change is that economics evolves based on new facts ra... View the full answer