Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

onetime2 · 08-19-2004, 04:29 AM

Being an economist by training and spending many years using it in my profession(s) I unequivocally state that economics is subjective.

Economics is among the most complicated subjects in the world (at least in my opinion) because there is really no limit to the depth of analysis that you can do. At some point the depth goes too far and you're drilling into almost inconsequential data with very limited impact to the overall research but most don't ever come close to delving too deep.

GDP is absolutely the best measure of the economy right now but it can not be looked at in isolation. It does not include, by definition, the things you cite but true economic analysis uses those external facts to lend perspective to the GDP number. No one is predicting the levels of growth within say NYC to remain the same post 9/11 as it was a onetime (hopefully) event and the federal, state, and international flow of funds being dedicated to the region will go away at some point.

What everyone needs to be aware of is the fact that there is no single economic indicator that you can look to to "understand" the economy. You always need to luck at multiple indicators, the trends occuring in each, their interaction with each other, and the forces (short or long term) shaping the economy.

As far as factcheck. org, while they are a little less biased about the presentation of economic "facts" they are far from masters of economic theory. IMO, they could go much farther in their economic explanations than they do. Far too often they point to only that certain things are inaccurate in ads and do not go on to explain why these partial truths in themselves may be important and/or how they interact with economic health.

08-19-2004, 04:29 AM	#3 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	Being an economist by training and spending many years using it in my profession(s) I unequivocally state that economics is subjective. Economics is among the most complicated subjects in the world (at least in my opinion) because there is really no limit to the depth of analysis that you can do. At some point the depth goes too far and you're drilling into almost inconsequential data with very limited impact to the overall research but most don't ever come close to delving too deep. GDP is absolutely the best measure of the economy right now but it can not be looked at in isolation. It does not include, by definition, the things you cite but true economic analysis uses those external facts to lend perspective to the GDP number. No one is predicting the levels of growth within say NYC to remain the same post 9/11 as it was a onetime (hopefully) event and the federal, state, and international flow of funds being dedicated to the region will go away at some point. What everyone needs to be aware of is the fact that there is no single economic indicator that you can look to to "understand" the economy. You always need to luck at multiple indicators, the trends occuring in each, their interaction with each other, and the forces (short or long term) shaping the economy. As far as factcheck. org, while they are a little less biased about the presentation of economic "facts" they are far from masters of economic theory. IMO, they could go much farther in their economic explanations than they do. Far too often they point to only that certain things are inaccurate in ads and do not go on to explain why these partial truths in themselves may be important and/or how they interact with economic health. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.