Economics and Politics is there a link?

In “Does Economics Still Progress?” Paul Krugman wrestles with the idea that challenges whether economists of yesteryear know more, less, or the same as the ones of today. He goes on to state that he dislikes when people talk about economics as a science because he thinks that economics progressed over time. He goes on to compare economists from 1931 to 1971 to today and states that he does not know whether the economists of today are brighter than those from those years. Krugman then states that economists now-a-days really do not find ways to fix problems and only find partisan solutions. He also states that “liberal economists by and large do seem to be genuinely wrestling with what has happened, but conservative economists don’t.”

                I do agree with him that economies progress and I would add that it is ever changing. There are always new things being invented and new products and companies that make the horse different. The thing about this is that economics is a science because there have been ideas that have been thought of that still pertain to the things that we are seeing now. There are constants in economics that make the problem have similar solutions, so even if it is a different horse, it is still a horse.  The issues we are seeing now are similar to those of 1931 and 1971. The economy is still about competition and we still have companies competing, the only difference is that now-a-days this competition is not only domestic. We are now competing globally as well as domestically. Then looking at domestic economics, we still have wealthy people and poor people. Most of our population is not wealthy and are underprivileged just like in yester decades.  I do not agree with him in that only liberal economists are truly looking at the problems and trying to find solutions and that the only ones that thinking under party lines are the conservatives. I think both sides play with all of the issues and both sides make partisan decisions. His editorial is called “The Conscience of a Liberal” so I can see why he is biased, but I also consider myself a liberal and I understand the game of politics. Conservatives are not the only ones playing politics, liberals do too. That is the way politics work, if one understands power one knows that any party playing for that power will work to get that most of the power  all of the time.

To Trust or Not to Trust?

    In HPV vaccine, Merck and Rick Perry's money, Sheila Krumholz and Michael Beckel discuss the role that companies play in politics. In this case they are looking at the questioning Rick Perry confronted by the other GOP candidates about the mandate of the HPV vaccine on young girls. They question his motive for making an executive order for this mandate to pass; was the decision taken because it is known that Merck has given Rick Perry a lot of money for his gubernatorial campaigns. The issue of being bought was raised by the other GOP candidates. The reason that this is an important editorial to read is because it puts to question the motives of decisions that are taken by our leaders. One then has to question how strong lobbying is and how much that affects our lives? Are we fed certain drugs because that company gave our leaders a lot of money or is it that those drugs are the best? As citizens we must feel that our leaders are being honest with us when they are making decisions that will affect us. The problem when these types of situations arise is that one starts to mistrust all of our elected officials. In order for a government to work, the citizens must trust its elected officials. When gains to a leader and the company is the result of a decision, that creates a huge mistrust of the system which creates bad government.