Economic Experts versus Average Americans
نویسنده
چکیده
In 2012 the National Public Radio program Planet Money created a fake presidential platform based on the issues a small sample of economists, with different political views, agreed upon. In focus groups this platform found no support among the public at large. Is this just a feature of the particular selection made by NPR or is it a generalizable feature? If so, is this because ordinary people have not been trained in economics or because economists lack common sense or miss important political considerations? In this article we try to address these questions. To do so, we compare the answers to a common set of policy questions provided by the Economic Expert Panel at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business (EEP) with those provided by the Chicago Booth/Kellogg School Financial Trust Index (FTI), which conducts quarterly interviews with a representative sample of the US population. Economists’ opinions differ greatly from those of other ordinary Americans: on average the percentage of agreement with a statement differs 35 percentage points between the two groups. This difference does not seem to be driven by a different composition of the sample. We also find a large variation in the difference between the two samples across questions. The topics most covered in the economic literature, where economists agree among themselves the most, are also the topics in which their opinions are most distant from those of average Americans. This difference does not seem to be Economic Experts versus Average Americans
منابع مشابه
Multi-period competitive cheap talk with highly biased experts
Each of n experts communicates with a principal about the privately observed quality of the expert’s own project via cheap talk, with new independently drawn projects available each period until the principal adopts one. Even when experts are highly biased in that they only receive a positive payoff if their own project is selected, we show that informative equilibria may exist, characterize a ...
متن کاملAmericans misperceive racial economic equality.
The present research documents the widespread misperception of race-based economic equality in the United States. Across four studies (n = 1,377) sampling White and Black Americans from the top and bottom of the national income distribution, participants overestimated progress toward Black-White economic equality, largely driven by estimates of greater current equality than actually exists acco...
متن کاملCrash and Wait? The impact of the Great Recession on Retirement Planning of Older Americans.
This study uses data from pre- and post-crash surveys from the Cognitive Economics study to examine the impact of recent stock and labor market wealth losses on the planned retirement ages of older Americans. Regression estimates imply that the average wealth loss between July 2008 and May/June 2009 is associated with an increase in planned retirement age of approximately 2.5 months. Furthermor...
متن کاملAmerican’s desire for less wealth inequality does not depend on how you ask them
A large body of survey research offers evidence that citizens are not always fully aware of the economic and political realities in their respective countries. Norton and Ariely (2011) extended this research to the domain of wealth inequality, showing that Americans were surprisingly unaware of the shape of the wealth distribution in America. Using an alternative methodology, Eriksson and Simps...
متن کاملUnderstanding the Increase in Disability Insurance Benefit Receipt in the United States.
T he share of working-age Americans receiving disability benefits from the federal Disability Insurance (DI) program has increased significantly in recent decades, from 2.2 percent in the late 1970s to 3.5 percent in the years immediately preceding the 2007–2009 recession and 4.4 percent in 2013. Some experts have interpreted the increase as evidence of a need for significant reform. In this jo...
متن کامل