.
.
.
This neo-liberal, sock therapy, Monetarist policy was never tried, will never be tried in countries where there are NO JEWS.
e.g Mongolia or China, North Korea.
Comment by Scott Creighton:
(Like the blessed skewed science on man-made global warming, the economics behind the notion that national debt kills economic growth is flawed… fundamentally flawed…and it took two students to expose it after all these years when so many “experts” either signed onto the misleading doctrine or simply kept quiet so they could keep their jobs. Two graduate students showed the world what history already taught us, that the IMF/Chicago School neoliberal economics is not even on the level of pseudo science, it’s bogus clap-trap cobbled together by snake-oil salesmen and peddled by liars.)
_______________________________
Meet the 28-Year-Old Grad Student Who Just Shook the Global Austerity Movement
By refreshing news blogspot.
Most Ph.D. students spend their days reading esoteric books and stressing out about the tenure-track job market. Thomas Herndon, a 28-year-old economics grad student at UMass Amherst, just used part of his spring semester to shake the intellectual foundation of the global austerity movement.
.
Herndon became instantly famous in nerdy economics circles this week as the lead author of a recent paper, "Does High Public Debt Consistently Stifle Economic Growth? A Critique of Reinhart and Rogoff,"
that took aim at a massively influential study by two Harvard
professors named Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff. Herndon found some
hidden errors in Reinhart and Rogoff's data set, then calmly took the
entire study out back and slaughtered it. Herndon's takedown — which
first appeared in a Mike Konczal post that crashed its host site with traffic — was an immediate sensation. It was cited by prominent anti-austerians like Paul Krugman, spoken about by
incoming Bank of England governor Mark Carney, and mentioned on CNBC
and several other news outlets as proof that the pro-austerity movement
is based, at least in part, on bogus math.
We spoke to Herndon about his crazy week, and how he's planning to celebrate his epic wonk takedown.
"This week has been quite the week," Herndon told us in a phone call
from UMass Amherst's campus. "Honestly, I was not expecting at all the
kind of attention it has received."
Herndon, who did his undergraduate study at Evergreen
State College, first started looking into Reinhart and Rogoff's work as
part of an assignment for an econometrics course that involved
replicating the data work behind a well-known study. Herndon chose
Reinhart and Rogoff's 2010 paper, "Growth in a Time of Debt," in part,
because it has been one of the most politically influential economic
papers of the last decade. It claims, among other things, that countries
whose debt exceeds 90 percent of their annual GDP experience slower
growth than countries with lower debt loads — a figure that has
been cited by people like Paul Ryan and Tim Geithner to justify
slashing government spending and implementing other austerity measures
on struggling economies.
Before
he turned in his report, Herndon repeatedly e-mailed Reinhart and
Rogoff to get their data set, so he could compare it to his own work.
But because he was a lowly graduate student asking favors of some of the
most respected economists in the world, he got no reply, until one
afternoon, when he was sitting on his girlfriend's couch.
"I
checked my e-mail, and saw that I had received a reply from Carmen
Reinhart," he says. "She said she didn't have time to look into my
query, but that here was the data, and I should feel free to publish
whatever results I found."
Herndon pulled up an Excel spreadsheet containing Reinhart's data and quickly spotted something that looked odd.
"I clicked on cell L51, and saw that they had only averaged rows 30 through 44, instead of rows 30 through 49."
What
Herndon had discovered was that by making a sloppy computing error,
Reinhart and Rogoff had forgotten to include a critical piece of data
about countries with high debt-to-GDP ratios that would have affected
their overall calculations. They had also excluded data from Canada, New
Zealand, and Australia — all countries that experienced solid growth
during periods of high debt and would thus undercut their thesis that
high debt forestalls growth.
Herndon
was stunned. As a graduate student, he'd just found serious problems in
a famous economic study — the academic equivalent of a D-league
basketball player dunking on LeBron James. "They say seeing is
believing, but I almost didn’t believe my eyes," he says. "I had to ask
my girlfriend — who's a Ph.D. student in sociology — to double-check it.
And she said, 'I don't think you're seeing things, Thomas.'"
The mistakes Herndon found were so big, in fact, that even Herndon's professors didn't believe him at first. As Reuters reported earlier:
"At first, I didn't believe him. I thought, 'OK he's a student, he's got to be wrong. These are eminent economists and he's a graduate student,'" [UMass Amherst professor Robert] Pollin said. "So we pushed him and pushed him and pushed him, and after about a month of pushing him I said, 'Goddamn it, he's right.'"
After consulting his professors, Herndon signed two of them — Pollin and
department chair Michael Ash — on as co-authors, and the three of them
quickly put together a paper outlining their findings. The paper cut to
the core of a debate that has been dividing economists and politicians
for decades. Fans of austerity believe that governments should cut
spending in order to grow their economies, while anti-austerians believe
that government spending in times of economic duress can create growth
and reduce unemployment, even if it increases debt in the short term.
What Herndon et al. were claiming, in essence, was that the
pro-austerity movement was relying on bogus information.
When Herndon and his professors published their study, the reaction was
nearly immediate. After Konczal's blog post went viral, Reinhart and
Rogoff — who got a fawning New York Times profile when
their book was released — were forced to admit their embarrassing error
(although they still defended the basic findings of their survey).
And today, another UMass Amherst professor,Arindrajit Dube, followed up on Herndon's paper with additional proof that there were serious theoretical and causal problems (as opposed to just sloppy Excel work) in the Reinhart-Rogoff study.
.
Observers have been raising serious questions about what Herndon's work means for the future of austerity politics, and Reinhart and Rogoff's respectability as scholars.
And today, another UMass Amherst professor,Arindrajit Dube, followed up on Herndon's paper with additional proof that there were serious theoretical and causal problems (as opposed to just sloppy Excel work) in the Reinhart-Rogoff study.
.
Observers have been raising serious questions about what Herndon's work means for the future of austerity politics, and Reinhart and Rogoff's respectability as scholars.
Herndon says he isn't implying that Reinhart and Rogoff intentionally
skewed their data to support a pro-austerity finding, and simply
reported the errors.
"I don’t want to sound the alarm and call for anyone’s jobs," he says. "I didn’t do this to be punitive or malicious."
With Reinhart and Rogoff's once-authoritative work now under serious
question, there's no question that the austerity movement has been dealt
a major blow. But Herndon's finding won't likely stop politicians from
trying to reduce the deficit. The global march for austerity began
before Reinhart and Rogoff's work was published, and will continue as
long as there are people who believe that governments can shrink their
way to prosperity.
Still, Herndon holds out hope. He calls austerity policies in the United
Kingdom and elsewhere "counterproductive," and implies that part of why
he took up the study of Reinhart and Rogoff's study was to question the
benefits of current economic policy.
.
"I have social motivations," he says. "I care deeply about how policy affects people."
.
.
"I have social motivations," he says. "I care deeply about how policy affects people."
.
Now that he's left his mark, Herndon says he's coping with the effects
of academic celebrity — getting a new publicity head shot taken,
receiving kudos from his professors and colleagues, handling interview
requests. He says he's gotten extensions on some of his papers in order
to handle his quasi-fame, but that he hasn't been popping Champagne yet
in celebration.
"I’m going to celebrate this weekend," he says. "But for now, I have a really gnarly problem set."