David Warsh on Ferguson and Summers

David Warsh reflects on the corruptions of economists and on Larry Summers in particular in this week's column at Economic Principals.

A fundamental problem here is distinguishing between

"economist X, who has worked in the financial industry, often supports the positions of the financial industry because s/he is a shill"

and

"economist X, who has worked in the financial industry, often supports the positions of the financial industry because s/he came to those positions sincerely based on theory and evidence and then was hired by the financial industry in part because s/he holds those positions"

and

"economist X, who has worked in the financial industry, often supports the positions of the financial industry becasue of the knowledge s/he gained while working in the industry"

Rather than devoting a lot of effort to sorting among these ill-identified alternatives, why not devote the effort to actually thinking about the economics and evidence related to the positions themselves?