This is why an economist should nominated to the Supreme Court

So much of law depends on good social science, good empirical experience, good modeling of a complex world. That spells ECONOMICS.

I’ve long thought the Supreme Court would perform better if it was populated by 9 economists instead of 9 lawyers. But I’d be happy if it was split 4-5 or even 1-8, so long as there could be one voice for economics.  Tyler Cowen’s essay in the NY Times affirms my confidence in our field:

The crucial implication is this: If you treat all individuals as fundamentally the same in your theoretical constructs, it would be odd to insist that the law should suddenly start treating them differently.

P.S. I am not on a Cowen / Times kick at all.  Just coincidence that my blog browsing has hooked me twice on Tyler’s insights today!

One response to “This is why an economist should nominated to the Supreme Court

  1. I think everyone should take an economics course in high school or college. When I took my first economics course, I found the meaning to life. Then, I realized that I wanted to be an economist!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s