Posted on 10/12/2001 6:45:14 AM PDT by SJackson
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:45:35 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
On Wednesday, the Nobel Prize committee announced this year's winners for economics: Berkeley's George Akerlof, Stanford's Michael Spence, and Columbia's Joseph Stiglitz. Americans all, they won the award for their path-breaking contributions to the economics of "asymmetric" information.
The awards may well be justified, especially for Messrs. Stiglitz and Akerlof. But unfortunately the Nobel committee, and economists in general, are missing the big picture on information economics. Let me explain, first by highlighting the three economists' contributions.
(Excerpt) Read more at interactive.wsj.com ...
This is at the core of the success of free market systems, a very difficult concept for many people.
Why is he snubbing Spence? I noticed that both are at Stanford -- some kind of personal rivalry???
Prof. Spence really only had one significant contribution, the one described in the article. Profs. Stiglitz and Akerlof have amassed a much more substantial body of work.
This is at the core of the success of free market systems, a very difficult concept for many people.
Sure, but people want to be protected from asset bubbles, wealth-effects, and economic overheating. Even a good deal of conservatives and Republican's have become anti-capitalists in order to avoid those things. Heaven forbid that investment in technological growth should ever lead our economy again. It's far better to lose trillions of dollars in wealth than to ever allow another internet IPO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.