Overpowering majority of free-market apologists? Not so much.


Lawrence White, professor at Missouri-St. Louis and blogger at Division of Labour, has some more to say about the supposed bias against free-market critics in economics:

So what is Cohen’s anecdotal evidence that criticism of the free market renders one an “apostate” (Blinder’s term)? (1) Alan Blinder is sore about the criticism he has received over his claim that outsourcing and trade may result in a loss of 30 to 40 million American jobs. (2) David Card is sore about the criticism he has received (and pointed questions his students have gotten on the job market) over his much-debated finding (with Alan Kreuger) that a hike in the minimum wage didn’t cost jobs in the New Jersey fast-food industry (described fawningly by Cohen as “groundbreaking research on the effect of the minimum wage”). Sorry, soreheads, but that’s no evidence that free-market ideology rules the roost. Everybody’s claims get criticized. Ask any free-market economist if he or she receives criticism. [emph. added]

Indeed, the original NYT article makes those complaining about bias sound like some of the people who file charges of harassment against somebody who criticizes them.White also points out that according to a scientific survey, only 8% of members of the American Economic Association consider themselves to be “supporters of free-market principles”, and only 3% “strong supporters”. Not exactly what you would call a dominant, hegemonic influence.

Technorati Tags:

Comments Off on Overpowering majority of free-market apologists? Not so much.

Filed under Academic freedom, Higher ed, Life in academia

Comments are closed.