There have been an awful lot of high-profile battles going on in the blogosphere lately. And I'm not talking about the typical blogger-vs.-blogger spats. I'm talking about big-shot social science Ph.D.s going at it hammer-and-tongs over issues directly related to public policy. A breakdown:
-- Richard Posner vs. Alan Greenspan on whether Greenspan deserves some blame for the economic crisis, with commentary by Megan McArdle (she calls this round for Posner).
-- Scott Sumner vs. Brad DeLong and Paul Krugman on the utility of models of asset-price bubbles. Of course, Sumner has been fighting with Krugman practically non-stop since joining the blogosphere.
-- A real-live bet (for money!) between Bryan Caplan and John Quiggin over U.S. vs. E.U. unemployment rates over the next decade. I previously covered this here.
-- William Easterly vs. Jeffrey Sachs, and Dani Rodrik, and Paul Collier, all on different aspects of development policy. Plus a bonus: Dambisa Moyo goes after Sachs, too! It's usually not nice to gang up, but then again, Sachs started it.
-- Robin Hanson vs. Andrew Gelman on the signaling motivations of the approaches conservatives and libertarians take to public policy, with a cameo by Tyler Cowen whose contribution was one pithy line: "don't forget the villains also".
Whew! I must say, I've tried to pick a few fights in recent days but nobody ever notices me (except dear Emmanuel, who is always willing to argue in favor of the proposition that I am either silly or stupid). But for fun, here's my scorecard on the above arguments:
1. Posner vs. Greenspan is a draw; Greenspan certainly bears some responsibility for the consequences of his actions, however it is hard to imagine anybody else in the same position doing much better (as evidenced by the fact that Greenspan had few critics until last Fall). I also think that Posner over-states his case.
2. Sumner vs. Krugman/DeLong goes to Sumner; even if Krugman and DeLong succeed in fitting past data onto a model, its utility going forward is probably close to nil.
3. I'd take Caplan's side over Quiggin's in their bet, but I think it'll be very close. Caplan's first proposal was pretty obviously skewed in his favor, which is why Quiggin forced a compromise. The new terms strike me as fair and much more interesting.
4. Easterly vs. Sachs goes to Easterly; Easterly vs. Rodrik is probably a draw; Easterly vs. Collier goes to Collier.
5. Hanson vs. Gelman goes to Gelman.
IPE @ UNC
IPE@UNC is a group blog maintained by faculty and graduate students in the Department of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The opinions expressed on these pages are our own, and have nothing to do with UNC.
Bookshelf
Tags
Academia Adjustment Afghanistan Africa AIG America Argentina Austerity Bailout Banking Bargaining Basel Bernanke Bias Blogging Business cycle; recession; financial crisis Cap and Trade capital controls capital flows central banks; moral hazard Chavez China China Trade Climate Change Contentious Politics Cuba Currencies Currency Crises; financial crisis Current Account Data Debt Debt; China; United States; Decession Politics Decoupling Deflation democracy Democrats; Trade policy development Diplomacy Dollar; China; Currency Manipulation; Exchange Rates dollar; exchange rate policy ECB ECB; Fed; Monetary Policy Economic Growth Economics Egypt election EMU; monetary union Environment EU; Agriculture; Common Agricultural Policy Euro Europe; labor; immigration European Union Exchange Rates Farm Bill; Agriculture FDI Fed; Monetary Policy finance financial crisis financial crisis; subprime Fiscal Policy; monetary policy; elections Fiscal Stimulus Foreign Aid Foreign Policy France Free Trade Agreements G-20 G20 Summit Game Theory Germany global recession globalization Grand Theory Great Britain Greece health care reform Hegemony Human Rights Iceland imbalance IMF immigration Incentives income distribution income inequality; globalization India Inequality inflation institutions Interests international finance International Law International Monetary System International Relations Investment IPE Iran Iraq Ireland ISA Italy Japan labor markets Latin America Libya Macroeconomics Marxism Mexico Microfinance Miscellany monetary policy Monetary policy; Federal Reserve moral hazard Narcissism Networks Nobelist Smackdown North Korea Obama Oil PIGS Pirates Political Economy Political Methodology Political Science Political Survival Political Theory Power Protectionism Protests Public Choice Public opinion Rational Choice regulation Research Review Russia Sanctions Security Dilemma security threats Soccer Social Science Sovereign Debt Spain Sports Statistics stock markets Systems Tariffs TARP Taxes TBTF Technocracy technology terrorism Trade trade policy UNC Unemployment United States US-South Korea Venezuela WTO WTO; Doha
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(521)
-
▼
May
(36)
- How Much of an Outlier Was 2008?
- Just How Irrelevant Am I?
- Oil is creeping back up.
- Self-Outsourcing?
- Differing Views on China
- On the (Ir)relevance of IR Scholarship to Policy M...
- Bad News for Microfinance Proponents
- Political Incentives and the Israel/Palestine Situ...
- Handicapping the Upcoming E.U. Parliament Elections
- Social Science Smackdown Week!
- Props
- We Can't Stop Carbon Emissions (redux)
- Mo' Money, Less Problems
- Quote of the weekend.
- More on US/EU Unemployment
- Links for the Weekend
- Interesting Links.
- Seppeku
- US Unemployment Rate Higher than Europe's?
- Helping the Poor by Giving Them Money
- Happiness Is Keeping Poor People Away
- Blame Game
- Nye and Drezner on Policy Relevance, Academia and ...
- From "Obscure Journal" Article to Mainstream Policy
- Is Obama the New Nixon?
- Cognitive Dissonance and the Financial Crisis
- The Risks of the Intertemporal Carry Trade
- In Which French Winemakers Act, Well, French
- Who Gets E.U. Farm Subsidies?
- More 'Crisis of Capitalism' Hyperbole
- Pass the Cheese
- This Is How We Do It
- Hedge Funds Fight Back
- We Can't Stop Carbon Emissions
- Everybody Get Down
- Videos for the Weekend: Recent TED Talks
-
▼
May
(36)
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Social Science Smackdown Week!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment