MARC보기
LDR03468cmm u2200505Ii 4500
001000000315272
003OCoLC
00520230525170324
006m d
007cr cnu---unuuu
008181018s2019 nju ob 001 0 eng d
020 ▼a 9780691184050 ▼q electronic book
020 ▼a 0691184054 ▼q electronic book
020 ▼z 0691179204
020 ▼z 9780691179209
035 ▼a 1825332 ▼b (N$T)
035 ▼a (OCoLC)1057341727
040 ▼a N$T ▼b eng ▼e rda ▼e pn ▼c N$T ▼d N$T ▼d OCLCF ▼d YDXIT ▼d 248032
049 ▼a MAIN
050 4 ▼a HD87 ▼b .C65 2019
072 7 ▼a BUS ▼x 070000 ▼2 bisacsh
08204 ▼a 338.9 ▼2 23
1001 ▼a Colander, David C., ▼e author.
24510 ▼a Where economics went wrong : ▼b Chicago's abandonment of classical liberalism / ▼c David Colander and Craig Freedman. ▼h [electronic resource]
260 1 ▼a Princeton : ▼b Princeton University Press, ▼c [2019]
300 ▼a 1 online resource.
336 ▼a text ▼b txt ▼2 rdacontent
337 ▼a computer ▼b c ▼2 rdamedia
338 ▼a online resource ▼b cr ▼2 rdacarrier
504 ▼a Includes bibliographical references and index.
5208 ▼a Milton Friedman once predicted that advances in scientific economics would resolve debates about whether raising the minimum wage is good policy. Decades later, Friedman's prediction has not come true. In Where Economics Went Wrong, David Colander and Craig Freedman argue that it never will. Why? Because economic policy, when done correctly, is an art and a craft. It is not, and cannot be, a science. The authors explain why classical liberal economists understood this essential difference, why modern economists abandoned it, and why now is the time for the profession to return to its classical liberal roots. Carefully distinguishing policy from science and theory, classical liberal economists emphasized values and context, treating economic policy analysis as a moral science where a dialogue of sensibilities and judgments allowed for the same scientific basis to arrive at a variety of policy recommendations. Using the University of Chicago--one of the last bastions of classical liberal economics--as a case study, Colander and Freedman examine how both the MIT and Chicago variants of modern economics eschewed classical liberalism in their attempt to make economic policy analysis a science. By examining the way in which the discipline managed to lose its bearings, the authors delve into such issues as the development of welfare economics in relation to economic science, alternative voices within the Chicago School, and exactly how Friedman got it wrong.
5880 ▼a Online resource; title from PDF title page (EBSCO, viewed October 22, 2018).
590 ▼a Master record variable field(s) change: 050
650 0 ▼a Economic policy.
650 0 ▼a Liberalism.
650 0 ▼a Comparative economics.
650 7 ▼a BUSINESS & ECONOMICS / Industries / General. ▼2 bisacsh
650 7 ▼a Comparative economics. ▼2 fast ▼0 (OCoLC)fst00871323
650 7 ▼a Economic policy. ▼2 fast ▼0 (OCoLC)fst00902025
650 7 ▼a Liberalism. ▼2 fast ▼0 (OCoLC)fst00997183
655 4 ▼a Electronic books.
77608 ▼i Print version: ▼a COLANDER, DAVID. ▼t WHERE ECONOMICS WENT WRONG. ▼d [Place of publication not identified] : PRINCETON UNIV PRESS, 2018 ▼z 0691179204 ▼w (OCoLC)1032585817
85640 ▼3 EBSCOhost ▼u http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=1825332
938 ▼a EBSCOhost ▼b EBSC ▼n 1825332
990 ▼a 관리자
994 ▼a 92 ▼b N$T