Rejoinder: Response to Comments
Economists can to some extent enlighten policymakers and the public and influence public policy. That enlightenment is achieved more by concrete policy work and application of basics than by fancy models and fancy statistical significance. There is a trade-off between relevance/importance and rigor/precision. Because many economists concentrate on rigor and precision, their influence in public affairs is not as good as it could be. The professional emphasis on scholastic crafts forsakes the Smithian character of political economy. A more Smithian character for the economics profession would lead to better government policy. The primary article by Daniel B. Klein is followed by comments by Gordon Tullock, Deirdre McCloskey, Israel M. Kirzner, C.A.E. Goodhart, Robert H. Frank and James K. Galbraith and a rejoinder by Daniel B. Klein.
Volume (Year): 27 (2001)
Issue (Month): 2 (Spring)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (201) 684-7346
Web page: http://www.ramapo.edu/eea/journal.html
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eej:eeconj:v:27:y:2001:i:2:p:231-238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Victor Matheson, College of the Holy Cross)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.