Grandstand. The economy is today considered primarily as a network of constraints imposed on all human actions, defining the framework in which they take place. The President of the United States Bill Clinton summed it up in a pithy formula: “It’s the economy, stupid!” », to signify to his opponents that his desires should not be taken for realities.
By a formidable inversion, it would therefore no longer be the natural laws of physics, chemistry or biology which would limit the freedom of humans, but those of the economy, which, although being only social constructions evolving historically, are, so to speak, “naturalized”.
Recognition of this essential role played by the “laws of economics” logically leads to turning to economists who have made a profession of studying and understanding them. In fact, in all the major developed countries there are “economic councils” supposed to help politicians define “realistic” public policies, that is to say taking into account these famous “laws”.
However, some economists regret not being listened to by politicians and seek to understand the reasons for such deafness. Among those that are commonly put forward, we find the way of reasoning of each other. Formal rigor, based on abstraction and the statistical data of economists, would be opposed to political discourse that plays with the facts (euphemistic way of speaking of lies), to win the support of an electoral clientele.
Short and long term
Another explanation, more fundamental and often repeated, would be the adoption of different horizons of reflection. The long term for economists, which is the logical time for the completion of market adjustments after an initial political shock, and the short political term of electoral deadlines, which prevents taking into account the major challenges of the future identified by economists (as they had done so well before the 2008 crisis…).
A final explanation would be the lack of economic culture, from which economists by definition do not suffer, or even the deregulation of the information market, which puts on the same level ideas that come from scientific consensus and eccentric rantings.
To make it clear to what extent economic culture is necessary, we often take the example of unemployment. Those who have never done economics would have a static view of the world that would lead them to believe that employment is a cake of fixed size, which would justify the reduction of working hours to reduce unemployment. On the other hand, economists sure of their knowledge explain that we are in a dynamic system, innovations generating growth and therefore new jobs.
You have 41.57% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.