Despite decades of debate, many economists can’t agree with each other about fundamental issues. We can’t agree what causes unemployment, we can’t agree what fixes it and we can’t agree whether we should run deficits when the economy slows down. Careers could be made on the length of some unresolved disputes with colleagues.
Lawyers, on the other hand, don’t appeal to their opponents to change their mind, they appeal to judges to resolve disputes. And while the wheels of justice might grind slowly at times, they look like a racing car when compared to the economics profession. So when economic arguments wind up in court, the debate can shift a lot more quickly.
Related documents
Between the Lines Newsletter
The biggest stories and the best analysis from the team at the Australia Institute, delivered to your inbox every fortnight.
You might also like
Why a fossil fuel-free COP could put Australia’s bid over the edge
When the medical world hosts a conference on quitting smoking, they don’t invite Phillip Morris, or British American Tobacco along to help “be part of the solution”.
Burning homes and rising premiums: why fossil fuel companies must pay the bill
Another summer, another round of devastation: homes lost, communities evacuated, lives upended.
Time to wind back taxpayer-funded diesel for mining giants
There’s a common-sense decision the federal government could make today that would help the transition to renewable energy and save taxpayers billions of dollars a year.