Stimulus and Ideology: What’s the Score

by Will Wilkinson on January 25, 2009

Will Ambrosini does some scorekeeping among macroeconomists. It seems like there is maybe more consensus than I had thought, which I guess is somewhat comforting. 

Will Wilkinson has words for macro economists. He got me thinking about the political affiliations of macroeconomists. Here’s what I’ve found:

Macroeconomist’s name IDEAS rank Political affiliation Views on fiscal stimulus
Robert J. Barro 3 Republican?, no political appointments Tax-cuts not spending
Robert E. Lucas 5 ? Con, but concerned about sudden drop in consumption
Edward C. Prescott 7 He signed astatmentopposing Obama’s tax/trade policy ?
Martin S. Feldstein1 8 “conservative” Pro, likes military spending
Daron Acemoglu2 10 ? Con, worries about long term consequences
Olivier Blanchard 13 ? Pro
Mark L. Gertler 14 ? ?, but he says monetary policy can still be effective
Thomas J. Sargent 17 ? Con
Lars E. O. Svensson 21 ? ?, but has written on the effectiveness of monetary policy when interest rates are zero
N. Gregory Mankiw 22 Republican Con
Jordi Galí 25 ? ?, his research is the only legitimately modern macro that shows fiscal stimuls can work
Ben S. Bernanke 33 Republican appointee His public statements are Pro, but I’m not sure what his private opinions are. His research is all money all the time.
Michael Woodford 34 ? ?, but in a survey has said the consensus is “fiscal measures are not suitable for accurate ‘fine-tuning’, even if it is not agreed that they have little effect.”
John B. Taylor 49 Republican appointee Pro, but has shown the recent tax rebate was ineffective at stimulus

 

It seems most macro folks are conservative or Republican. The Gali paper on effective fiscal policy seems like it might be worth taking a look at.

You’ll notice Delong and Krugman (and Alesina, Becker, Cochrane, Fama, Murphy, and Zingales) are missing from this list of MACROeconomists. This is because they are not macroeconomists.

It seems to me the historians were calling the finance people boneheads for their ideas on macroeconomics. I wonder what the planetary scientists think about the exobiologist’s views on theoretical cosmology.

In reply to the contention that right-winger economists have lined up against fiscal stimulus, Brad Delong asks: “What is Martin Feldstein? Chopped liver?” It seems like lots of people think so every time I try to cite his estimates of the elasticity of labor supply when debating taxes. Ah, the fine art of “siffing.”

  • thanks!
  • I'm a little depressed that you want to give comfort to the people who want to dismiss modern economics because it can't answer everything.

    You need to distinguish between the scientific proposition that Say's law doesn't automatically hold and therefore aggregate demand can be propped up by monetary or fiscal instrument with the more tortured question of how best to do this and whether government can deliver what would be technically ideal. The former question has been answered, and truthful macroeconomists will tell you Hayek was wrong and Keynes right, even if they prefer Hayek's politics. The latter question is more a matter of practical judgment than economic science. Naturally, ideology becomes a bigger predictor than expertise at that point.
  • Jayson Virissimo
    Will, are you able to use your influence at The Cato Institute to have a survey of macroeconomists taken? It would be very instructive to know what they think of the stimulus plan.
  • mike
    Uh, that list leans pretty darn hard to the right. And I think Mankiw, while widely advertising 'con' positions, hasn't come out strongly against any stimulus at all. I'd be surprised if you could pin him down on that.

    I'm quite sure that if you polled the top 100 macro economists there would be overwhelming support for stimulus.

    Credibility here is sinking *way* fast.
  • Bill Woolsey
    DeLong looks like a macroeconomist to me.
  • Which one?
  • conchis
    Not sure about the classification of Acemoglu as "Con". From the linked piece:

    "These concerns are not a sufficient reason for rejecting the stimulus plan, but rather a call to consider its implications for long-run growth. Decisive action on the crisis is necessary; not just soften the blow of the recession but also to avoid a backlash that could be deeply harmful to long-run growth...

    ...A comprehensive stimulus plan, even with all of its imperfections, is probably the best way of fighting these dangers. Nevertheless, the details of the stimulus plan should be designed so as to cause minimal disruption to the process of reallocation and innovation."

    It's possible, of course that he's he's written something critical of the details elsewhere.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: