Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2208.07839

Why Economic Theories and Policies Fail? Unnoticed Variables and Overlooked Economics

Abstract

Accuracy of economic theories and efficiency of economic policy strictly depend on the choice of the economic variables and processes mostly liable for description of economic reality. That states the general problem of assessment of any possible economic variables and processes chargeable for economic evolution. We show that economic variables and processes described by current economic theories constitute only a negligible fraction of factors responsible for economic dynamics. We consider numerous unnoted economic variables and overlooked economic processes those determine the states and predictions of the real economics. We regard collective economic variables, collective transactions and expectations, mean risks of economic variables and transactions, collective velocities and flows of economic variables, transactions and expectations as overlooked factors of economic evolution. We introduce market-based probability of the asset price and consider unnoticed influence of market stochasticity on randomness of macroeconomic variables. We introduce economic domain composed by continuous numeric risk grades and outline that the bounds of the economic domain result in unnoticed inherent cyclical motion of collective variables, transactions and expectations those are responsible for observed business cycles. Our treatment of unnoticed and overlooked factors of theoretical economics and policy decisions preserves a wide field of studies for many decades for academic researchers, economic authorities and high-level politicians.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Victor Olkhov. 2022-08-14. Why Economic Theories and Policies Fail? Unnoticed Variables and Overlooked Economics. https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.07839

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN

Bricks or Cash? Externalities of Housing Upgrading in High-density Cities

We estimate housing externalities in a high-density city, exploiting the staggered rollout of Singapore's nationwide Main Upgrading Programme for public housing. Controlling for nonrandom neighborhood exposure, we find that upgrading raises treated buildings' prices by 11.5% upon completion and neighboring buildings' resale prices by about 2% within 500 meters, decaying to zero beyond. A model with distance-decaying externalities shows that in dense settings spillovers justify the distortions of in-kind provision; this advantage diminishes and reverses at lower densities. Administrative data on over 2 million residents show that upgrading disproportionately retains older incumbents, suggesting age-specific amenities as an underexplored externality channel.

econ.GN

The Joneses Visit an Economics Lab

Existing literature offers persuasive evidence that individuals care about how their consumption compares to that of peers, and proposes a large variety of explanatory models. The present paper proposes a common framework for many of those models, and compares their ability to predict behavior in a laboratory experiment. We find evidence of Keeping up with the Joneses motivations but also find that conspicuous consumption is enhanced by Veblen motivations arising from peers' ability to observe one's own choice. Among the seven quasi-linear preference models we compare, our data are best explained by a model that contrasts envy and pride (upward vs downward comparisons) using a value function borrowed from Prospect Theory.

econ.GN