More Conversations About Richard Posner And The People He Fights With

As I predicted in my last
post on this topic, Richard Posner’s current dispute with the macroeconomists
continues to provide entertainment and, perhaps, education (at least for me).  For example, in a third
post on Friday on the topic, Posner notes that his two prior blog entries
(discussed in the Lounge here)
“about Christina Romer's August 6 speech on the stimulus package have drawn an
unusual amount of commentary, including criticisms (some by seemingly reputable
economists) that are at once obtuse and vitriolic,” and further argues that “Mark
Thoma, who like DeLong is notably abusive, resorts to the academic trick of
reading a passage literally in order to make the author seem an ignoramus.”  The post goes on to further discuss the
Romer speech and her prior academic work, and to address other critics.

For their part, Paul Krugman,
Brad
DeLong, and Menzie
Chinn, among others, continue to dispute Posner’s allegations and challenge
his expertise, analysis, and ethics. 
However, I found this
post by Robert Waldman to be the most interesting, because it’s primarily about
academic in-fighting and mutual contempt, and you know we love that type of
thing here.  The post is long and
my edited version no doubt leaves out important relevant nuances, so read the
whole thing to get the full picture:

I
think the problem is partly that the economics profession is divided into
schools of thought — roughly fresh water and salt water — with profound
contempt for each other (although salt water economists such as C. Romer, D.
Romer and N.G. Mankiw tend to be polite in public).

I
think it very likely that Romer's speach [sic] and her academic work is
considered to be not* "responsible academic analysis" by top
economists working at the economics departments of the Universities of Chicago
and Minnesota.  . . .

Some
(Thoma mostly) suggest that Posner is showing contempt for the economics
profession assuming a lawyer, law professor, judge and top notch microeconomist
can handle macro without brushing up on the terminology. My guess is nearly the
opposite. I suspect that he is in contact with macro economists who share his
view of Romer's speech and that this made him sure he is on safe ground. . . .

I
think Posner genuinely doesn't know that a large fraction of the economics
profession agrees with Romer's approach.

The
fact is that top fresh water economists think they are the only top notch
economists and dismiss salt water economists including the ones with Nobel
prizes and stuff.

Well, hopefully they won’t all get tired and stop arguing
after that.  This has been fun, and
without such diversions I might be forced to prepare for the new semester.