I'm going to come back to this at some point because while Jon Stewart's critique (at least as how it's presented in this article) comes off as too glib and too easy and simplistic a dismissal, there are reasons why economics and economists can have such a dismal reputation. The go-to example I can think of is the Nobel-prize winning work of William Nordhaus, which is brutally criticised in the Intercept's article "When Idiot Savants Do Climate Economics". His work hugely and dangerously underestimates the risks and economic costs posed by global warming and climate change (something you mention in your article, when you scoff at the idea of humanity "sleepwalking into it"). I can easily believe people as a whole wouldn't sleepwalk into it, but evidence suggests Nordhaus would, and as economist Stephen Keen remarked in that article, what are people supposed to think about economics if the quality control for the Nobel Prize is that poor?
Agree we should think more like economists, but when I went through the Stewart/Thaler podcast transcript this morning it came off more as a conflict of values than sheer arrogance or ignorance. He identifies some true aspects of economics that he happens to disagree with, and expresses that in polite, honest way for the most part.
Gosh, this is another incredible compilation! And I don't just say that 'cuz our kid is a PhD economist. ;-)
I'm going to come back to this at some point because while Jon Stewart's critique (at least as how it's presented in this article) comes off as too glib and too easy and simplistic a dismissal, there are reasons why economics and economists can have such a dismal reputation. The go-to example I can think of is the Nobel-prize winning work of William Nordhaus, which is brutally criticised in the Intercept's article "When Idiot Savants Do Climate Economics". His work hugely and dangerously underestimates the risks and economic costs posed by global warming and climate change (something you mention in your article, when you scoff at the idea of humanity "sleepwalking into it"). I can easily believe people as a whole wouldn't sleepwalk into it, but evidence suggests Nordhaus would, and as economist Stephen Keen remarked in that article, what are people supposed to think about economics if the quality control for the Nobel Prize is that poor?
There's no scientific validity to economics.
https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262049658/blunt-instrument/
Agree we should think more like economists, but when I went through the Stewart/Thaler podcast transcript this morning it came off more as a conflict of values than sheer arrogance or ignorance. He identifies some true aspects of economics that he happens to disagree with, and expresses that in polite, honest way for the most part.
https://infovores.substack.com/p/jon-stewart-is-right