楼主: 鬼魅魍魉
7194 55

保罗·克鲁格曼:西方经济学家们怎么如此离谱? [推广有奖]

41
wangxiangli521 发表于 2009-10-21 17:03:41
经济学,是一个社会性学科。社会性学科带有太多的随意性。
若无闲事挂心头.便是人间好时节.

42
ALEXGUHUAWEN 发表于 2009-10-21 17:10:12
醍醐灌顶!

43
sungmoo 发表于 2009-10-21 17:50:21

44
fancunhui 发表于 2009-10-21 17:51:11
走了好远,回头一看,却又回到了起点

45
梦入江南烟水路 发表于 2009-10-21 17:51:21
看看啦。。。。。。。。。。。。。
如果有一个稳定的现金流,就将它证券化

46
wgq19870108 发表于 2009-10-21 18:08:44
好贴,赞一个

47
楚尘 发表于 2009-10-21 18:35:51
这是一篇近期在国外引起轰动和热烈讨论的文章
楼主能不能把汉语版的发到我邮箱?kangta1923@tom.com

英语版开头
How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?

I. MISTAKING BEAUTY FOR TRUTH
It’s hard to believe now, but not long ago economists were congratulating themselves over the success of their field. Those successes — or so they believed — were both theoretical and practical, leading to a golden era for the profession. On the theoretical side, they thought that they had resolved their internal disputes. Thus, in a 2008 paper titled “The State of Macro” (that is, macroeconomics, the study of big-picture issues like recessions), Olivier Blanchard of M.I.T., now the chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, declared that “the state of macro is good.” The battles of yesteryear, he said, were over, and there had been a “broad convergence of vision.” And in the real world, economists believed they had things under control: the “central problem of depression-prevention has been solved,” declared Robert Lucas of the University of Chicago in his 2003 presidential address to the American Economic Association. In 2004, Ben Bernanke, a former Princeton professor who is now the chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, celebrated the Great Moderation in economic performance over the previous two decades, which he attributed in part to improved economic policy making.
Last year, everything came apart.

48
showerxiaoer 发表于 2009-10-21 18:36:28

49
楚尘 发表于 2009-10-21 18:40:29
最后向楼主致敬

50
lujingliang11 发表于 2009-10-21 19:48:22
这不是克鲁格曼书里的内容么 楼主说明一下

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

本版微信群
jg-xs1
拉您进交流群
GMT+8, 2025-12-30 21:17