It gets to be a frustrating cycle when criticism of bad thinking is deemed to be anti thinking, when criticism of bad statistics is deemed to be anti-fact, when criticism of bad science is deemed to be anti science and when criticism of misguided faith is deemed to be anti-religious.

Addressing economics specifically I believe what has been accepted orthodoxy for nearly a century in our national economic policy, with a few respites, has been terribly misguided and rationalized by some of our most respected intellectual institutions.  Much of the damage is not faced until years after the legislators are out of office and the professors have retired.  This is not being anti- intellectual, it is being critical of what D. Greenfield calls a manufactured intelligence- designed to make you feel smarter rather than actually becoming smarter.

PhD quants moved from universities to Wall Street and created risk models that were misused by financial masters of the universe to makes disastrous decisions.  The heavily credentialed moved to K Street to write regulations that only compounded the problem.  Financial instrument were rationalized that should have been banned.  We replaced a philosophical understanding of risk with a delusional mathematical certainty. It was readily accepted because we all wanted risk free prosperity.

James Grant proposed am IQ test for anyone working in the financial field.  A score over 115 would bar you from the field.

print