Study: Self-Identified "Progressives" Have Little Understanding of Economics

#1
paul1454

paul1454

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2008
Messages
683
Likes
0
#1
A recent study published in the Econ Journal Watch (a peer reviewed journal) found that those who self-identified as "progressive" or "liberal" had significantly less understanding of basic economic principles than those identifying as "conservative." Now, clearly this doesn't hold true across the board (I know plenty of conservatives who know next to nothing about economics), but I thought it was interesting. You can read the article by clicking the link above. Here is a quick highlight taken directly from Todd Zywicki's blog:

Some of the results in this new article by Zeljka Buturovic and Dan Klein in Econ Journal Watch (a peer-reviewed journal of economics) are startling:

67% of self-described Progressives believe that restrictions on housing development (i.e., regulations that reduce the supply of housing) do not make housing less affordable.
51% believe that mandatory licensing of professionals (i.e., reducing the supply of professionals) doesn’t increase the cost of professional services.
Perhaps most amazing, 79% of self-described Progressive believe that rent control (i.e., price controls) does not lead to housing shortages.
Note that the questions here are not whether the benefits of these policies might outweigh the costs, but the basic economic effects of these policies.

Those identifying as “libertarian” and “very conservative” were the most knowledgeable about basic economics. Those identifying as “Progressive” and “Liberal” were the worst.

It would be hard to find a set of propositions that would meet with such a degree of consensus among economists to rival these propositions–which boils down to supply restrictions raise prices and price controls create shortages. These are issues on which economic theory is exceedingly clear, well-confirmed over decades of empirical support, and with a degree of unarguable consensus among trained scholars in the field. Apparently the existence of a “consensus” among trained scholars on certain policy issues is less important on some issues than others.
Click to expand...

The Further Left Your Are, the Less You Know About Economics
 
#4
#4
i have yet to have met someone who is a obama supporter who understands economics. i have met liberals who are smart about that, but they aren't obama supporters.
 
#5
#5
I think it would be hard for a study like this to separate one's understanding of economics from their automatic inclination of whether these things are good or bad. If you want A to happen, you are much more likely to say it doesn't have any negative impacts - and vice versa.

I have to think that basic economic questions, not those posed within the context of known liberal/conservative policies, would provide a better measure of the true economic understanding of the various groups in question. It might still come up with difference in understanding, but it would be more representative, IMO.
 
#7
#7
droski said:
i have yet to have met someone who is a obama supporter who understands economics. i have met liberals who are smart about that, but they aren't obama supporters.
Click to expand...

I know several former Obama supporters who are no longer supporters, because they actually applied what they know about economics to his policies. It's only a matter of connecting the dots with many people.
 
#8
#8
TennTradition said:
I think it would be hard for a study like this to separate one's understanding of economics from their automatic inclination of whether these things are good or bad. If you want A to happen, you are much more likely to say it doesn't have any negative impacts - and vice versa.

I have to think that basic economic questions, not those posed within the context of known liberal/conservative policies, would provide a better measure of the true economic understanding of the various groups in question. It might still come up with difference in understanding, but it would be more representative, IMO.
Click to expand...

sounds like they did ask that way

the questions here are not whether the benefits of these policies might outweigh the costs, but the basic economic effects of these policies.
Click to expand...
 
#9
#9
lawgator1 said:
Not that you care, but Zywicki is a well known conservative hack, booted off the Board of Trustees at Dartmouth.

Dartmouth College Office of Alumni Relations: Transcript of Trustee Todd Zywicki '88's Remarks to <br>Pope Center, October 27, 2007
Click to expand...

1. I know who Zywicki is.

2. He wasn't booted off dartmouth's board of trustees because he was a "conservative hack." It was because he made comments disparaging the board.

3. Whether he is or is not a conservative hack is not an issue. He didn't write the article nor did he participate in the study. I simply posted a quote from his blog summarizing some of the study's findings to save some typing time.
 
#10
#10
volinbham said:
you do understand the concept of peer reviewed academic journals don't you?
Click to expand...


I understand: a blogger's interpretaton of the data; the bias in intepreting the answers; the inadequacy of the questions; that the questions do not measure what they purport to identify; the bias of the peers reviewing it; the assumptions being made going into it; the desire of the authors to prove the assumptions correct.

The assumption may well be correct. But the "study" is absolutely worthless as any type of scientifically valid representation of anything.
 
#11
#11
volinbham said:
sounds like they did ask that way
Click to expand...

I got that, but I am saying that individuals who support these policies may be unwilling to separate it ...or unable to.

For example, I believe you would get a different response, on average, if you asked:

-If I invoke a measure that decreases supply, will it increase the cost of that measure?

-If I place restrictions on housing development, will in increase the cost of housing?

I may be off base here, but I have to think there is some of that happening here.
 
#12
#12
lawgator1 said:
I understand: a blogger's interpretaton of the data; the bias in intepreting the answers; the inadequacy of the questions; that the questions do not measure what they purport to identify; the bias of the peers reviewing it; the assumptions being made going into it; the desire of the authors to prove the assumptions correct.

The assumption may well be correct. But the "study" is absolutely worthless as any type of scientifically valid representation of anything.
Click to expand...

Worthless is a little strong. If it had cast things in a light you liked, you wouldn't even bat an eye at how the survey was conducted.

I swear, there are nothing but party homers any more.
 
#13
#13
TennTradition said:
I think it would be hard for a study like this to separate one's understanding of economics from their automatic inclination of whether these things are good or bad. If you want A to happen, you are much more likely to say it doesn't have any negative impacts - and vice versa.

I have to think that basic economic questions, not those posed within the context of known liberal/conservative policies, would provide a better measure of the true economic understanding of the various groups in question. It might still come up with difference in understanding, but it would be more representative, IMO.
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think the questions could be asked in a manner in a way that avoids the bias you speak of. Economic ideas and theories are inherently connected to political issues.
 
#15
#15
I will be the first to admit to not understanding very much progressive economic theory. But with what is projected as knowledge from this Forum to small and large businesses. And through the halls of political power (either party). I take great solace that neither does anyone else.
 
#16
#16
lawgator1 said:
I understand: a blogger's interpretaton of the data; the bias in intepreting the answers; the inadequacy of the questions; that the questions do not measure what they purport to identify; the bias of the peers reviewing it; the assumptions being made going into it; the desire of the authors to prove the assumptions correct.

The assumption may well be correct. But the "study" is absolutely worthless as any type of scientifically valid representation of anything.
Click to expand...

aren't you the same person that once told us that Keith Olbermann's show was carefully researched and honest to a fault?

Maybe that wasn't you, to be honest, you all look alike after a while.
 
#17
#17
TennTradition said:
I got that, but I am saying that individuals who support these policies may be unwilling to separate it ...or unable to.

For example, I believe you would get a different response, on average, if you asked:

-If I invoke a measure that decreases supply, will it increase the cost of that measure?

-If I place restrictions on housing development, will in increase the cost of housing?

I may be off base here, but I have to think there is some of that happening here.
Click to expand...

I think you are absolutely correct, but I don't know if it really changes the bottom line. Refusing/unable to separate the issue from what you know about it's possible implications is still a form of not exercising an understanding of economics in one's voting.
 
#18
#18
lawgator1 said:
I understand: a blogger's interpretaton of the data; the bias in intepreting the answers; the inadequacy of the questions; that the questions do not measure what they purport to identify; the bias of the peers reviewing it; the assumptions being made going into it; the desire of the authors to prove the assumptions correct.

The assumption may well be correct. But the "study" is absolutely worthless as any type of scientifically valid representation of anything.
Click to expand...

You're passing these judgments on the academic quality of the study because of the blogger who covered it? What other information do you have about the authors, peer reviewers, etc.?

How can you say the study is ABSOLUTELY worthless? I have some questions myself, but it still provides some interesting data. What is your qualification to assert this study's ABSOLUTE worth?
 
#19
#19
Velo Vol said:
In other words, they're in-step with average, "real" Americans.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. The study showed that those self-identifying as "progressive" or "liberal" scored significantly worse than those self-identifying as "moderate."
 
#20
#20
IPorange said:
I think you are absolutely correct, but I don't know if it really changes the bottom line. Refusing/unable to separate the issue from what you know about it's possible implications is still a form of not exercising an understanding of economics in one's voting.
Click to expand...

Yes, but was that the primary conclusion of the study...or was it that they lacked an understanding of basic economics? There's a difference, IMO, from the standpoint of the conclusions of an academic study.
 
#22
#22
TennTradition said:
I got that, but I am saying that individuals who support these policies may be unwilling to separate it ...or unable to.

For example, I believe you would get a different response, on average, if you asked:

-If I invoke a measure that decreases supply, will it increase the cost of that measure?

-If I place restrictions on housing development, will in increase the cost of housing?

I may be off base here, but I have to think there is some of that happening here.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree with you on that. I also agree with IP in that those whose bias prevents them from accurately applying knowledge to a particular set of facts is very similar to someone who did not know the information to begin with.
 
#23
#23
TennTradition said:
I got that, but I am saying that individuals who support these policies may be unwilling to separate it ...or unable to.

For example, I believe you would get a different response, on average, if you asked:

-If I invoke a measure that decreases supply, will it increase the cost of that measure?

-If I place restrictions on housing development, will in increase the cost of housing?

I may be off base here, but I have to think there is some of that happening here.
Click to expand...

Here are the questions asked:

1. Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable.

2. Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those
services.

3. Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago.

4. Rent control leads to housing shortages.

5. A company with the largest market share is a monopoly.

6. Third-world workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited.

7. Free trade leads to unemployment.

8. Minimum wage laws raise unemployment.

The only one that I think would invoke bias would be #6 due to its use of the term "exploited."
 
#24
#24
TennTradition said:
You're passing these judgments on the academic quality of the study because of the blogger who covered it? What other information do you have about the authors, peer reviewers, etc.?

How can you say the study is ABSOLUTELY worthless? I have some questions myself, but it still provides some interesting data. What is your qualification to assert this study's ABSOLUTE worth?
Click to expand...


LOL. Did you bother to check out the authors of the study? Dan Klein's Homepage
 
#25
#25
paul1454 said:
I can't disagree with you on that. I also agree with IP in that those whose bias prevents them from accurately applying knowledge to a particular set of facts is very similar to someone who did not know the information to begin with.
Click to expand...

I liken it to those who talk about poor conservatives who continue to vote conservative being blind idiots...that if they voted in a liberal fashion, that they would help themselves, but they are too stupid to realize it. Obviously, it isn't that at all in most cases.

The reason I bring this up isn't because it's a great analogy of what is going on here from a decision stand point, but rather, a perception standpoint. Their decisions at the polls give some a perception that they don't understand what is going on. Likewise, this study seems to suggest that progressives lack a fundamental understanding of economics, not that they don't apply an understanding of economics in their voting/political decisions.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top