The world economy is more complicated than any of us can understand and getting more so by the day.

And this is stated every time an economist talks about the economy in media or to politicians.

Nah, just kidding. If economists did that then they would give up being the purveyors of conventional wisdom with all the good jobs that gives.

I am just going to quote myself here:

European Tribune - Galbraith, the Conventional Wisdom and the current mess

But who exactly needs the Conventional Wisdom?
Leaving Galbraith and just asking who needs this persistent system of ideas on just how things really work that fills in the gaps, I think it is pretty obvious. It is most critically needed by the government and more so the higher up in government. If the ruler pulls policy lever A: what will happen? If his advisors can not tell him, they are no good. If he himself admits that he does not know the consequences of this actions, then what good is having a ruler? Wheter it is God or market that rewards the faithful, wheter history is run by Great men or the forces of production, there needs to be some way to estimate what will happen.

If economists were honest according to this piece, their advice is not worth more then that of a priest or a court astrologer. So to follow that thought, economists appearing in media or presenting to politicians are lying for profit or are deluded.

If Karl Whelan is a non-deluded honest economist, perhaps he should join other non-deluded, honest economists in doing something about that. There are a lot of academic disciplines were lying for money or spouting deluded conclusions in media ends your academic career. That could be an approach to try.

Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se