Economists Do It With Models

Warning: “graphic” content…

Bookmark and Share
Want To Be In The Next Keynes-Hayek Video???

April 4th, 2011 · 10 Comments
Just For Fun · Uncategorizable

You know you do…if you aren’t familiar, here’s the first one:

It’s admittedly not the most objective thing I’ve ever seen, and here is my earlier take on the issue. Anyway, Russ and John are in the process of making another one, and they want your help:

EconStories and Emergent Order are proud to announce “The Fight of the Century”, a music video film shoot taking place at the Drew University campus in Madison, New Jersey, on April 16 and 17, 2011.

Day 1 Shoot (April 16, 2011) – “The Congressional Hearing” – A cast of Congresspeople, Bank Heads, Fed and Treasury Officials. Featured roles include: “Committee Chair”, “Co-Chair”, “Congressman”, “Congresswoman”, and 10 “Banksters” including Ben Bernanke and Tim Geitner. The cast of characters on Day 1 will also need to be present at “The Boxing Match” shoot on Day 2. We’re looking for people to fill these roles in the 40-60 year-old range. We’re also looking for 50 extras who are in the 40-60 year-old range to attend the hearing.

Day 2 Shoot (April 17, 2011) – “The Boxing Match”- A large cast of 100 extras in the crowd cheering and watching the fight go down. Other featured roles include: “The Boxing Ref”, “The Announcer”, “Ludwig Von Mises”, “Jean Baptiste Say”, “Thomas Malthus”, “John R. Hicks”, “Ring Girls”, and all the “Congresspeople” and “Bank Heads” from Day 1. Age range 18-70 year-olds. If you are interested in any of the named character roles you need to look the part*. All the economist roles are on the older side. That said, if you feel that you look a lot like any of the characters, go ahead and send me a pic at:  lisa at

Transportation accommodations provided. From New York City to shoot location and back. Bus departure location T.B.D.

You can access the signup form here if you are interested and in the area. I am supposed to be in New York that weekend, so I might hop on down to see what it’s all about. (I’m only a little disappointed that I am not old enough to play any of the substantial parts. Wonder if they’ll make an exception? 🙂 )

Tags: Just For Fun · Uncategorizable

10 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Punditus Maximus // Apr 5, 2011 at 9:28 am

    Meh. Austrian economics is a religion. When you reject empiricism, you’re either a parlor game or a religion.

    That’s why it’s so attractive to libertarians — their blind worship of the idea of property rights fits right into the Austrian disdain for anything but blind worship.

  • 2 Punditus Maximus // Apr 5, 2011 at 9:29 am

    And if this recession has proved anything at all, it’s that Keynes was right and both Friedman and Hayek were wrong.

  • 3 JMom // Apr 5, 2011 at 5:26 pm

    Wouldn’t a “sexy scientist” be an excellent choice to play a Washington intern and/or Congressman’s girlfriend?

  • 4 Eat The Babies! // Apr 6, 2011 at 3:00 pm

    Ha ha ha… that’s hilarious, but no way to I want to help them propagate that Austrian nonsense.

    Sigh, you know… I say nonsense. It isn’t really nonsense. Hayek has a lot of good points. So does Keynes.

    The trouble is, the crazy policymakers just take the simplest pieces of both’s argument and go nutty with them. I’m much less comfortable with Hayek’s craziness than I am with idiotified-Keynes, tho, so yeah…

    tho I do think Russ Roberts is one of the more honest economists out there. His podcast is so good sometimes, and I love the way he honestly expresses doubts about his own thinking.

    I still think their video efforts just feed the nutjobs tho.

  • 5 Eat The Babies! // Apr 6, 2011 at 3:02 pm

    P.S. I shouldn’t have said “most honest economists out there.” What do I know?

    I should have just said: “I find Russ Roberts honest and open in a very satisfying way.”

    Sheesh. Gotta watch that judgementalism.

  • 6 econgirl // Apr 6, 2011 at 4:34 pm

    Two things:

    1. I would like to point out that my mother is encouraging the idea that I should play the intern/girlfriend role despite not being “qualified” to be a congresswoman. (I would also like to point out that I am legally old enough to be a member of Congress, so there.)

    2. I try to be very careful regarding my presentation of macroeconomics, especially where policy is concerned, since I don’t think that there is convincing enough data to determine who is right and who is wrong. Therefore, just as I would like my kids to be aware of the existence of multiple religions, I also present you with multiple macroeconomic viewpoints. I will admit that I didn’t feature this video for a while because I felt that it was too biased, but I do like that it’s a starting point for discussion. I particularly agree with the oversimplification points made above and appreciate that my readers are too thoughtful to be fooled by that nonsense.

  • 7 Chris // Apr 17, 2011 at 10:05 pm

    I find it absolutely refreshing that so many of the readers of the actual site understand Economics well enough to know that what Hayek and von Mises practice is not economics.

    On Facebook some of the devotees evidently did not get the memo that Austrian philosophy had failed the test of time on several occasions, here.

  • 8 Chris // Apr 17, 2011 at 10:11 pm

    jodi, if you think there is not enough data to make a solid judgment on “right vs wrong” I would direct you to the following piece, which clearly shows that the economy did not behave in any way, shape or form, that the Austrian theories would have predicted.

    The piece also highlights that according to Austrian Business Cycle “mal-investment” theory, our Great Recession would have been significantly less severe.

    I just feel that there is, in fact, an abundance of damning empirical data to highlight the poor, poor performance of Austrian ec.

  • 9 Jacob // Jun 4, 2011 at 8:40 pm

    Maybe Quiggin should read Rothbard’s History of Money and Banking.

    People who criticize the Austrian School for rejecting empiricism don’t seem to get just why that is.

    John Quiggin set up strawn man after strawn man with his criticism of Rothbard. Rothbard wrote that the Panic of 1819 was created by inflation (an increase in the supply of money or credit disproportionate to the amount of goods and services available ((any dictionary from as late as the 1970’s will define inflation this way!!!!!)) that was not sustained by the Bank of the U.S. as it was not rechartered. Not to mention his analysis of the other panics involves the way that the gold standards was treated (fix parity see: to understand the way that our idiot politicains have dealt with the “dollar” and gold in the past).

    People who criticise the Austrian school for their credit cycle theory need to first understand their theory of money and credit. The Austrian Theory is integrated you must understand it all to understand any of it. You also need to know a smidgin more history that Johnny boy there.

  • 10 Jacob // Jun 4, 2011 at 8:54 pm

    second post.

    Quggins even says, “I suspect that the macroeconomic model that emerges from the current crisis will have a recognisably Austrian flavour…”

    and no mention of the civil war national banking monopoly. no mention of the recession in 1920/21 that was statistically worse than 1929 where Harding took a “bold path of deflation,” and the market corrected in 18 months. A far cry from Hoover’s ERA and FDR’s N(I)RA. No mention of the attempt of the Fed to bailout the British pound because of their misuse of the gold standard in order to fund WWI.

Leave a Comment