A healthy economics has got to have both conceptual, theoretical research and applied, empirical research.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Economics is a strange science. Our subject deals with some of the most important as well as mundane issues that impinge on the human condition.
Economic science concerns itself primarily with theoretical and empirical generalizations about the behavior of individuals, institutions, markets, and national economies. Most academic research falls in this category.
The ultimate purpose of economics, of course, is to understand and promote the enhancement of well-being.
Economics is mostly how humans rationalize who gets what and why. It's how we instantiate our preferences about status, privileges, and power.
People want to think of economics as a natural science, like physics, with the comforting reliability of simple-to-understand theories like F=MA. Unfortunately, it isn't. Economics is a social science, and the so-called theories are really social and moral constructs.
Good economic theory must give the people the chance to use their talents to build their own lives. We must get away from the traditional route where the rich will do the business and the poor will depend on private or public charity.
The whole intention of empirical economics is to force theory down to Earth.
I think economics - and this is what I've tried to impart - has a tremendous amount of human interest in it.
Economics is a subject profoundly conducive to cliche, resonant with boredom. On few topics is an American audience so practiced in turning off its ears and minds. And none can say that the response is ill advised.
Much theoretical work, of course, focuses on existing economic institutions. The theorist wants to explain or forecast the economic or social outcomes that these institutions generate.
No opposing quotes found.