�鶹ֱ��

I was heartened to read Howard Marks’ piece “Macro models only provide an illusion of knowledge” (, September 9). As a critique of economic forecasting, the points he makes are unassailable. Some, in fact, are obvious. The broad economy is indeed too complicated to forecast accurately; consumers may actually behave differently at different times and models are incapable of dealing with things that have not been seen in modern times.

The far more interesting question is why forecasters continue doing what they do knowing all of the above and more. Marks does not believe that forecasters are crooks or charlatans and believes that they mostly think they are doing something useful. I am inclined to agree. But I wish he had elaborated on the “self-interest” that presumably biases their self-assessments of the work they do.

I would venture that there is a professional motive for perpetuating — through the use of elegant and abstract models — the fantasy that economics is a science. The prestige, stature and influence that such a myth permits is undeniable. Yet, far more perniciously, the ostensible neutrality of “economic science” provides seemingly unshakeable ideological cover against critics who (more realistically) accentuate power, inequality and politics.

Mariano Torras
Professor of Economics
�鶹ֱ��, Garden City, NY, US

Letter in response to this letter:

��/��