Book review: Krugman, P. (2020): Arguing with Zombies, New York, NY, USA (416 pages, W.W. Norton and Company, hardcover, ISBN 978-1-324-00501-8)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
As an undergraduate student in the 1990s, Paul Krugman's work, along with that of Joseph Stiglitz, was instrumental in my studies in economics.As an instructor in the 2020s, I was excited to find that the Nobel Laureate's book Arguing with Zombies, which is mainly based on his New York Times columns, helped to make sense of the economic orientation and situation in my home province, Alberta, where the United Conservative Party (UCP) came to power in 2019.The UCP government was extremely concerned about the previous government raising the minimum hourly wage by more than C$4 in fewer than three years but showed no qualms in reducing corporate tax rates by 4 percentage points, eliminating the carbon tax and cutting spending.This approach continued through the COVID-19 pandemic, as the government cut the post-secondary budget by 20 per cent over a four-year plan, and proposed a 3 per cent wage rollback for overworked nurses in the midst of the ongoing pandemic, while announcing investments to the tune of billions of Canadian dollars in Keystone XL, a risky and unnecessary oil pipeline.Krugman's book helps us to understand how such an economic orientation, which rests on pandering to corporate interests and harming public interest, arises from zombie ideas that are promoted by rich right-wing individuals, who fund partisan think-tanks (Krugman 2020: 3), who argue that governments should create privately funded and privately managed healthcare systems, who believe that higher deficits are due to higher spending and not to lower taxes, and who insist that cutting taxes on the wealthy and the corporations induces them to work hard and invest respectively (ibid.: 195, 225 and 229).All of this is based on the fanatic appeal to free-market orthodoxy, which, according to Krugman, dies hard (ibid.: 91).This is because, starting from ECON 101 (the principles-level economics course), instructors teach students the principles of neoclassical puritanism that people are rational and free markets work, as prices move to match supply and demand (ibid.: 138).Krugman not only highlights zombie ideas, he also systematically destroys them.He states that, based on cognitive psychology and behavioural economics, people are not rational, utility maximization is a foolish idea, equilibrium is ludicrous, and perfect competition is irrelevant for many industries (ibid.: 146 and 402).Besides panning modern monetary theory as an odd doctrine rife with confusions, and upholding the case for free trade, he comes close to the ideas espoused in heterodox economics by Komlos (2019) and Reardon et al. (2018).Krugman argues that pushing for balancing the budget during a recession only makes it worse and that fears of spiralling debt during a recession are exaggerated (Krugman 2020: 6 and 204).He states that some things like social security and healthcare insurance are better provided by the government than the private sector (ibid.: 15 and 30).In the context
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,070 | 0,055 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».