There was a bit of a blow-up earlier this year over Gerald Friedman's analysis of Bernie Sanders' economic plans. Paul Krugman, Christina and David Romer, Brad DeLong and others (including yours truly ) said that Friedman was being overly optimistic about the effects of stimulus - some said he had overestimated the remaining output gap, others questioned the use of " Verdoorn's Law " to predict that stimulus can increase productivity growth to very high levels. Others, like JW Mason and Dean Baker, defended Sanders. To me, it seemed that the coup-de-grace was delivered by Justin Wolfers : When I pointed Mr. Friedman to this critique of his analysis, he simultaneously accepted and rejected it He accepted it, telling me that “I may have made a mistake.” But he also rejected this critique, arguing that his figures are based on an alternative view of the world, stating: “To me, when the government spends money, stimulates the economy, hires people who spend, that s...
Comments
Post a Comment