<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Createquity.Createquity.</title>
	<atom:link href="https://createquity.com/tag/textbook-economics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://createquity.com</link>
	<description>The most important issues in the arts...and what we can do about them.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2020 20:17:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Lessons I Learned in Business School (Or, My Humble Attempt to Save You $150k)</title>
		<link>https://createquity.com/2009/06/lessons-i-learned-in-business-school-or/</link>
		<comments>https://createquity.com/2009/06/lessons-i-learned-in-business-school-or/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ian David Moss]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evaluation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[negotiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risk]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textbook economics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://createquity.com/2009/06/lessons-i-learned-in-business-school-or-my-humble-attempt-to-save-you-150k.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I really didn&#8217;t know what to expect when I came to business school in the fall of 2007. I had lived my whole post-college life in the nonprofit sector, and most of that time was spent hanging around musicians. I was brought up by two ex-hippies who, shall we say, did not exactly fit in<a href="https://createquity.com/2009/06/lessons-i-learned-in-business-school-or/" class="read-more">Read&#160;More</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jSTeDrbLy7I/SidkSHcQ3JI/AAAAAAAAAU0/AHK_WPSEdG8/s1600-h/Manual_decision_tree.jpg"><img decoding="async" style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 338px; height: 400px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_jSTeDrbLy7I/SidkSHcQ3JI/AAAAAAAAAU0/AHK_WPSEdG8/s400/Manual_decision_tree.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5343349745296399506" border="0" /></a>I really didn&#8217;t know what to expect when I came to business school in the fall of 2007. I had lived my whole post-college life in the nonprofit sector, and most of that time was spent hanging around musicians. I was brought up by two ex-hippies who, shall we say, did not exactly fit in with corporate culture. (My mom did have a job at a bank once, which she used primarily as an opportunity to read up on astrology textbooks.) So I had a number of questions in my mind as I got ready to start my MBA program. Would I get along with my classmates? Would I get involved in the life of the school? Would I have time to compose and pursue individual projects? Would I actually learn anything?</p>
<p>If nothing else, I knew I would come out of the experience with two things: (a) a piece of paper in my hand that said I was a smart person and (b) a whole lotta debt. Both of these things turned out to be true. But that was about the extent to which my premonitions and preconceptions held water. Time and again, something about the experience would surprise me, and I remain now in awe of not only how much my feelings about b-school evolved, but how much <span style="font-style: italic;">I</span> evolved. In no particular order, then, I offer the most valuable concepts, ideas, skills, and learnings I take away from my four semesters in New Haven, CT:</p>
<ul>
<li>As math subjects go, an understanding of<span style="font-weight: bold;"> statistics </span>must rank close behind basic algebra in highest usefulness-in-daily-life-to-mental-effort-required ratio. It&#8217;s amazing to read websites like <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com">fivethirtyeight.com</a> now and actually understand how those graphs were produced. And if that&#8217;s not practical enough for you, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_analysis"><span style="font-weight: bold;">decision analysis</span></a> can shed light onto even the most intransigent dilemmas by identifying dominated (i.e., foolish) strategies and helping to organize one&#8217;s thinking. A tool that I will use for the rest of my life.</li>
<li><span style="font-weight: bold;">Program evaluation </span>is not rocket science. All it requires you to do is to apply logic <span style="font-style: italic;">relentlessly</span>, a skill that does take some practice. A class on ethics and human behavior taught us that the only reliable way to counteract persistent biases, such as overconfidence, is to ask oneself at critical junctures: &#8220;how could I be wrong?&#8221; This is what program evaluators, good ones anyway, do at every step of the process. It&#8217;s so simple, but it can save you a world of remorse down the line.</li>
<li>The teaching of <span style="font-weight: bold;">introductory economics</span> needs serious reform. I have <a href="https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths.html">written about this</a> at length, but having taken <a href="https://createquity.com/2008/10/behavioral-economics.html">additional coursework</a> in the subject and witnessed a global financial meltdown since my original rants, I now feel quite confident in saying that externalities and behavioral analysis should occupy a <span style="font-style: italic;">much</span> more prominent role in the discussion, and that normative judgments about policy  should be taken <span style="font-style: italic;">out</span>. Free markets with perfect information, perfect competition, and rational actors are the exception, not the rule.</li>
<li>Most of us are far too <span style="font-weight: bold;">risk-averse</span>. As a simple example: have you ever been really attracted to someone but decided not to ask them out because you were afraid of getting rejected? It&#8217;s silly, right? What, exactly, are the consequences of getting rejected? How is it worse than not asking in the first place? Take this thought and apply it to your job, a fundraising ask, an application to school &#8212; you name it. Make sure the risks you&#8217;re avoiding are actually risks, and not just fears in disguise.</li>
<li>When it comes to negotiation, it&#8217;s amazing what difference a little <span style="font-weight: bold;">planning</span> makes. Knowing <span style="font-style: italic;">exactly</span> what your preferences are and thinking about what concessions you&#8217;re prepared to make&#8211;and not&#8211;beforehand will equip you with the tools you need to guide the conversation toward an optimal conclusion. This little lesson can be applied to almost any kind of negotiation, not just the usual suspects like big business deals or bargaining at the flea market.</li>
<li><span style="font-weight: bold;">Presentation</span> matters. It really does. Oh sure, it doesn&#8217;t matter as much as content, at least in the long run. The thing is, presentation <span style="font-style: italic;">is a part of your content</span>. That&#8217;s why it matters.</li>
</ul>
<p>As much as I&#8217;ve learned from business school, perhaps the most profound lesson I take away is <span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">how much I still don&#8217;t know</span>. In 2006, I knew a hell of a lot about choral music, the history of experimental rock ensembles, who&#8217;s who in the American classical composer social hierarchy, and where to find hassle-free street parking in New York City. At the time, that seemed like a pretty decent chunk of stuff to know a hell of a lot about. I now know that it&#8217;s about 0.00000000001% of the full extent of human knowledge and achievement. After two years in business school, I can now claim a passing conversance with, oh, maybe 0.00000000003%. Which, you know, is triple what I knew before &#8212; and still BARELY ANYTHING.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I now have tools to help me make decisions and manage in situations even when I don&#8217;t have all the information. I know how to figure out what questions I must ask in order to get to the answers I need. I know how to surround myself with people who know more than I do about particular subjects so that I don&#8217;t have to keep reinventing the wheel. And most importantly, I can feel secure in the knowledge that, for as long as I live, I will never stop learning new things. And that is a great gift.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://createquity.com/2009/06/lessons-i-learned-in-business-school-or/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Around the horn: Spring break edition</title>
		<link>https://createquity.com/2009/03/around-horn-spring-break-edition/</link>
		<comments>https://createquity.com/2009/03/around-horn-spring-break-edition/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ian David Moss]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy & Advocacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[around the horn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collaboration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Richard Florida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textbook economics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://createquity.com/2009/03/around-the-horn-spring-break-edition.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I (started to) write this on an American Airlines flight to the Left Coast, where I’ll be attending a wedding and visiting old friends for the next week. Hasn’t really felt like spring break so far, what with the job hunt in full blast, but I suppose I should count my blessings that I have<a href="https://createquity.com/2009/03/around-horn-spring-break-edition/" class="read-more">Read&#160;More</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I (started to) write this on an American Airlines flight to the Left Coast, where I’ll be attending a wedding and visiting old friends for the next week. Hasn’t really felt like spring break so far, what with the job hunt in full blast, but I suppose I should count my blessings that I have vacation at all! It’s been a busy week on the internet, and here’s some of what’s passed across my browser:</p>
<ul>
<li>Sudhir Venkatesh (who may just be my favorite blogger on the planet) <a href="http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/got-clawbacks-thugz-on-the-bailout/">sat down with some kingpins of the “other” street</a> to get their take on things. Perhaps surprisingly, they have AIG’s back 100%.</li>
<li>Speaking of the crisis on Wall Street, business schools end up with a whole lot of egg on their faces in <a href="http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=c4e9e361-fcdd-4098-afe5-400051102592">this article</a> from the New Republic. Some choice quotes:<br />
<blockquote><p>Back in October, not long after Lehman Brothers collapsed and triggered a meltdown on Wall Street, one of the hottest e-mail forwards making the rounds among finance types was a letter by Andrew Lahde, a hedge-fund manager who had posted eye-popping 866 percent returns in 2008 by betting on increases in U.S. subprime mortgage defaults. Lahde was getting out on top, and his &#8220;So long, suckers!&#8221; missive made headlines&#8211;partly for his broadsides against predatory lenders, partly for his earnest digression in support of hemp products, and partly for his boasts about getting rich at the expense of Wall Street&#8217;s &#8220;low hanging fruit, i.e., idiots whose parents paid for prep school, Yale, and then the Harvard MBA.&#8221; These MBA grads, Lahde sneered, &#8220;who were (often) truly not worthy of the education they received (or supposedly received) rose to the top of companies such as AIG, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers and all levels of our government.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;In a way, finance professors caused this problem&#8211;I&#8217;m not bragging about this,&#8221; says Charles Trzcinka, who chairs the finance department at Indiana University-Bloomington&#8217;s Kelley School of Business. He points out that many of the financial tools that played a starring role in the current crisis, from the countless ways to divvy up and sell mortgage-backed securities to the explosion of credit default swaps, were taught and developed in business schools without, often, a full appreciation for how they could go sour&#8211;if, say, housing prices cratered or large counterparties went bust.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>Trouble was, many students weren&#8217;t exactly taking Ph.D. courses. &#8220;There were so many people who just wanted to learn enough to get a job in this field,&#8221; says Trzcinka. &#8220;This market was full of people who were really just salesmen. You&#8217;d get them in class and ask them questions [about the latest financial innovations], and, for the first ten minutes, they sound sophisticated. Then you probe a little deeper, and, for the next ten, they&#8217;re an idiot.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>Economic theories that would have been heretical 20 years ago&#8211;the idea, say, that people and markets don&#8217;t always behave rationally&#8211;are being greeted with fresh interest. At Harvard, informal debates are said to be breaking out in faculty lounges about whether professors should focus more on teaching students how to run businesses that are sustainable in the long-term, rather than just pawning off the latest hedging techniques.</p></blockquote>
<p>Ya think?</p>
<blockquote><p>Still, the changes amount to something less than an outright revolution. When I asked current MBA students what sorts of things they weren&#8217;t hearing discussed in class, the list of still-too-delicate topics included: whether executive pay schemes might have led people to take excessive risks; whether investment banks are really &#8220;value creating&#8221;; and, of course, what role MBAs might have played in the current crisis. Khurana told me that business schools still need to have a perhaps-uncomfortable discussion about their broader purpose in the world&#8211;a question that involves pondering &#8220;the fundamental relationship between the economy and society.&#8221; Not the sort of thing, alas, that&#8217;s easy to stick in a textbook.</p></blockquote>
<p>I’ve avoided for the most part the hardcore corporate finance classes here at SOM, so I can’t comment on the specifics of them, but in my own school&#8217;s defense it is worth noting that we have on faculty here one of the few Cassandras who called out the housing bubble way before it was fashionable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Shiller">Robert Shiller</a>. In general, the economics and finance faculty here seem to have a more behavioral orientation than average (that is, they believe that markets can be affected by human foibles, unlike Chicago-school economists who hold that markets are so perfect that any inefficiencies will automatically be arbitraged away immediately). That said, <a href="https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths.html">I’ll admit to experiencing more than a few “huh?” moments</a> as someone with an outsider’s perspective looking into this crazy world.</li>
<li>And maybe there is something to the value of that outsider’s perspective. Last week, I linked to a column that facetiously argued that artists and Wall Street execs should switch places for a day. Well, now we have an article that makes a much more serious—and fairly compelling, if you ask me—<a href="http://www.thebulletin.us/articles/2009/03/18/arts_culture/doc49c0d3b88e20e987634465.txt">version of that same argument</a>, pointing to the workshops that <a href="ttp://www.pilobolus.com/">Pilobulus Dance</a> holds for corporate employees. These types of training sessions are not unique—<a href="http://www.benjaminzander.com/">Benjamin Zander</a> of the Boston Philharmonic is also known to do them, as are members of the conductorless <a href="http://www.orpheusnyc.com/">Orpheus Chamber Orchestr</a><a href="http://www.orpheusnyc.com/">a</a>. As someone <a href="http://www.c4ensemble.org/">who built a chorus</a> with a similar model to that of Orpheus, I think that businesses could learn a lot from the arts. We are taught over and over again that competition is the panacea to everything and should be fostered in every context possible. But competition run amok leads to major agency problems, as we see in the current financial crisis, with employees looking out for themselves rather than the long-term future of their company (not to mention society). A functioning civilization relies on a delicate balance of competition and collaboration, market forces focused and directed by regulation and communal norms. Businesspeople have the competition part taken care of; artists can help with the collaboration.</li>
<li>Along the same lines, there was an article in the Wall Street Journal last month suggesting that business professionals <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123506769093324881.html?mod=WSJ_TimesEMEA">look to Hollywood for career cues</a>.</li>
<li>Andrew Dubber invents the <a href="http://newmusicstrategies.com/2009/03/18/unconsultancy/">Unconsultancy</a>, a great idea for freelancers short on business or working with clients who can’t afford to pay very much.</li>
<li>Fun article from a professional musician <a href="http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/mister-nelson-goes-to-washington/Content?oid=1162758">who spent a day lobbying in DC</a>.</li>
<li>So, all of the sudden everybody’s freaking out about the future of the arts. <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/life/theater/2009-03-01-artseconomy_N.htm">USA Today</a> ran an article pointing to difficulties in fundraising, which was followed by similar themes in the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123733242932363249.html">Wall Street Journal</a> and now philanthropy bloggers <a href="http://afine2.wordpress.com/2009/03/19/greatest-loss-of-2009-social-capital/">Allison Fine</a> and <a href="http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2009/03/the-crumbling-of-nonprofit-arts-organizations-what-models-will-rise-from-the-ashes.html">Beth Kanter</a> are getting into the act. Listen, I know things are bad out there, but the arts are going to be fine. The only field in human existence that specifically celebrates creativity for its own sake will be able to find creative solutions to its problems. That is not what I’m concerned about. What I am concerned about is the potential missed opportunity for the rest of society if the arts’ critical role to play in healing the massive damage from the last six months is not adequately understood or acknowledged. It kind of makes me think of the way the conversation about the environment has progressed in the past century. Public policy talk about the environment was once limited to talk about parks and conservation of natural preserves outside of urban areas. Then there was the backlash against pollution in the &#8217;60s and &#8217;70s, with the attendant laws and regulations that came with it. But it&#8217;s taken until today for the environment and energy to become inexorably linked in peoples&#8217; minds, for &#8220;green&#8221; concerns to be incorporated into any urban or regional development plan worth its salt, for for-profit companies to be thinking about sustainability at every turn. <span style="font-style: italic;">That&#8217;s</span> where the conversation about the arts needs to end up if we really want things to move forward. It&#8217;s already starting to happen thanks to the work of <a href="http://www.creativeclass.com/">Richard Florida</a> and many others in making that case. But you know, it’s a two-way street. At some point people on the “outside” are going to have to realize what they’re missing by not taking fuller advantage of one of the greatest natural resources in their midst, the surging creativity and imagination of their own fellow citizens.</li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://createquity.com/2009/03/around-horn-spring-break-edition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Economics myths</title>
		<link>https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths/</link>
		<comments>https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ian David Moss]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business school]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[free markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neoclassical economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[profit maximization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[textbook economics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When I first studied music theory approximately a decade ago, I was rather shocked to discover, unbeknownst to me and apparently every rock band whose music sent me into spasms of ecstasy when played on my headphones at high volume, that parallel fifths in music—not to mention octaves, cross relations, and leaping to a leading<a href="https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths/" class="read-more">Read&#160;More</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.unc.edu/%7Ecigar/CalvinEconomics.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img decoding="async" style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px;" src="http://www.unc.edu/%7Ecigar/CalvinEconomics.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>When I first studied music theory approximately a decade ago, I was rather shocked to discover, unbeknownst to me and apparently every rock band whose music sent me into spasms of ecstasy when played on my headphones at high volume, that <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_fifths">parallel fifths</a> in music—not to mention octaves, cross relations, and leaping to a leading tone, among countless other infractions—are <strong>bad, bad, evil, bad</strong>. Of course, no one who writes music nowadays actually believes this. But that’s not what they told me at the time, and that’s not how my assignments were graded. To this day, as a composer, I have yet to encounter a situation in which the ability to write sonatas in authentic 18<sup>th</sup>-century style has come in handy. Anyone? Anyone? Maybe it’s just me.<span id="fullpost"></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is not a case of running into some bad teachers. <em>This is the way music students are taught introductory music theory. </em>It’s a conservatory tradition that goes back hundreds of years, to a time when those parallel fifths actually mattered to people writing music professionally. It’s just that the pedagogy has fallen behind where the field is, to the tune of a decade or twenty.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I encountered this same feeling again this past semester when learning about economics for the first time. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that there is still much about economics, as a field, that I do not yet know or understand. I’m sure that there are smart people out there developing models that take into account the concerns I detail below. For now, though, I want to take a look at the assumptions that underlie the very practice of economics, and the way that those assumptions are presented unchallenged in the standard introductory curriculum.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If all economics tried to do was observe and model human behavior, I wouldn’t be writing this screed. But economists apparently feel that it’s okay to make not just “positive” statements, about what is, but “normative” statements as well, about what <a href="http://ingrimayne.com/econ/Introduction/Normativ.html"><em>ought to be</em></a>. I often felt, in my introductory econ classes and while reading my textbook, like I was watching an advertisement for Republican fiscal policy.<span> </span>Our reference text, the popular <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Microeconomics-5th-Robert-S-Pindyck/dp/0130165832"><em>Microeconomics </em>by Robert Pindyck and Daniel Rubinfeld</a>, does not shy away from applying classical economic theory to the issues of the moment. On the contrary, the book analyzes taxes, wage floors, price subsidies, and other attempts by the government to gain revenue or regulate prices for some social purpose. Each discussion is accompanied by helpful graphs that show you how each of these policies creates “deadweight loss” resulting from the reduction in the number of transactions.<span> </span>That’s right, they call it “deadweight loss.” Could they think of a more biased term? I mean, there’s no “happy joy gain” on the graph from the public benefits of fewer people smoking cigarettes or everybody having access to heat and hot water.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And that, friends, is the problem. Classical economics models have no reliable way to represent human happiness or suffering in a supply-and-demand graph. Little things like that are what economists call an “<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality">externality</a>” – i.e., they don’t know how to make it into a formula, so they’re just sort of going to pretend it doesn’t exist. (The issue of externalities is first addressed on page 621 of the Pindyck and Rubinfeld textbook, in the 18<sup>th</sup> and final chapter.) On the other hand, any attempt to mess with the market causes measurable deadweight loss, so that means it’s bad. It’s all so simple and convenient!</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I wouldn’t be harping on this except for the fact that there are actually people, seasoned professionals with jobs teaching economics to young minds, who think this way. Earlier this year, I attended a panel discussion (which was really more like a Lincoln-Douglas style high school debate on steroids) at the Yale Law School entitled “The Myth of the Rational Voter.” The guest star was an associate professor from George Mason University named <a href="http://economics.gmu.edu/bcaplan/">Bryan Caplan</a>, whose book was both the subject of discussion and the title of the event. Hoping to gain expert psychological insight into electoral politics, I was disappointed to find that the book was apparently an investigation into why “correct” economic policies generally become law despite a vast majority of voters holding “wrong” views about economics. And what were these “wrong” views, one might ask? Yup, you guessed it—tariffs are bad, taxes are bad, rent control bad, free markets good good good. Leaving aside the obvious methodological issues with such a survey (after all, government policies are generally designed to be of greater benefit to the average layperson than the average professional economist), what disturbed me was that there was absolutely no challenge to these basic assumptions from the other panelists. Caplan was allowed to present these opinions as foregone conclusions, as if economic science had shown them to be as obvious as the law of gravity. He also couldn’t help throwing in some smug digs at the (lack of) intelligence of his own students, which of course just made him all the more endearing.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I hear people talking like this and it makes me want to scream. Folks, <strong>there is no such thing as free markets </strong>in modern society. If markets were truly free, slavery would still be a booming industry in this country, as it was in the 1600s. If markets were truly free, we’d have paid bounty hunters roaming our cities, putting on hits for anyone who wanted to get rid of an inconvenient rival or former spouse. If markets were truly free, crime in poor areas would spiral out of control as public police departments were replaced by private security agencies who would charge more to serve high-crime areas because of higher costs. Heat? Electricity? Firefighting? Forget it, those would be private too. Can’t pay? Too bad.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The fact is, there is a basic tension in economics between efficiency and equality, which Pindyck and Rubinfeld readily acknowledge. Getting maximum productivity (from a profit standpoint) in a market means that people with lower incomes will be left out of the picture. Economists even have a name for these people. It’s “low-value consumers.”</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is an alternative way of looking at the above, which is that there is no such thing as something that’s <strong>not </strong>a free market. After all, the government systems we do have in place for human services, infrastructure, price regulation, and so on, are essentially the result of consumer action. They voted people into office to institute these reforms, a power no consumer had on his or her own. One could argue that these policies are the result of the “market” deciding, in aggregate, that prohibitions against certain industries might be a good thing. That environmental protection was worth setting limits on what large companies could put into the air or water. This view requires a broader conception of market activity that goes beyond merely buying and selling. It essentially says that whatever happens is part of the larger organism of humanity, that the actions companies and consumers take to affect the market are as much a symptom of the market as a driver of it. It says that markets will always be free so long as human beings are creating and living them.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To believe that, though, would invalidate the classical economic assumption that the only thing people are interested in is maximizing profit. Whoops!</p>
<p></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://createquity.com/2008/01/economics-myths/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
