Ignore 'Open Letters' From Economists
.webp)
Don’t be swayed by “open” letters signed by well-known and well-respected scholars, experts, professors, and businessmen.
Don’t be swayed by “open” letters signed by well-known and well-respected scholars, experts, professors, and businessmen. In recent years, it has become usual to find in the popular media that a new group of apoplectic economists—substitute “doctors,” “scientists,” or “tech leaders” depending on the days—have written another open letter (signed by many of their own), rather than debate the merits of the argument.
In particular, it has become fashionable for large groups of economists to weigh in on pressing political debates by affixing their names to open letters. Earlier this month, hundreds of academics, including Nobel laureates, professors and graduate students, signed a letter defending Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook and the principle of central bank independence. In April of this year more than 900 economists, including two Nobel Prize winners, issued an open letter denouncing President Donald Trump’s tariff policy. In the run up to the 2024 election, 23 Nobel Laureates in economics endorsed Kamala Harris’ economic policies over those of Trump. And during the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly 200 economists petitioned state governors to repeal anti-price gouging laws. These letters arrive with an air of authority, a united front of experts telling policymakers and the public what must be done to solve an untenable situation.
But we should be cautious of these pronouncements. Rather than treating them as gospel from the high priests of economic science, we should consider them warily, especially when the intended recipients are policymakers and politicians. The mere fact that hundreds of economists sign a letter does not make its assertions true. These open letters often function as a way to rally the troops politically, designed to influence decisions by the sheer weight of signatures, rather than the strength of a fully articulated argument.
Economic Dynamism
The Price of Stagnation: Britain’s Retreat from Dynamism
We face a basic issue: we do not let cities or communities grow or die.
.jpg)
London and the Architecture of Creative Growth
Preserving London's creative dynamism will require humility from policymakers and a commitment to keeping the city liveable.
.jpg)
.jpg)
The New Frontier of Capital: What SpaceX’s IPO Tells Us About American Capital Markets
The ultimate trajectory of SpaceX remains uncertain, a reflection of the inherent nature of progress at the frontier rather than a flaw in the system that produced it.
Chicago’s “Disappearing Middle Class” Can Be Found in Its Proliferating Upper Middle-Class Neighborhoods
The middle class has not been hollowed out; rather, the overall decline stems from the net movement of families upward into the upper-middle class.
.webp)
Is Economics a Failure?
Rather than ending with “economics is broken,” Alexander Rosenberg’s deliberately provocative book 'Blunt Instrument' argues that “economics is useful for a different reason than economists often say.” That is a serious and worthwhile thesis.
Locke, Meet Claude
The concern is not regulation per se. It is a regulation that outruns its justification by arriving before the evidence, foreclosing the technology before its benefits are understood, and insulating the powerful from competition that would otherwise discipline them. That is the pattern worth resisting.
