Ronald writes on January 6, 2012, quoting from an address by Robert F. Kennedy at the University of Kansas:
“Even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another great task. It is to confront the poverty of satisfaction a lack of purpose and dignity that inflicts us all.
“Too much and for too long, we seem to have surrendered community excellence and community values in the mere accumulation of material things.
“The gross national product does not allow for the health of our children, the quality of their education, or the joy of their play.
“It does not include the beauty of our poetry or the strength of our marriages; the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials.
“It measures neither our wit nor our courage; neither our wisdom nor our learning; neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country;
“It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.”
I have always found this text very inspirational.
I wish you the best of luck !
Thanks, Ronald. There’s still a tremendous gap between how orthodox economists measure well-being and what’s really of value. In these eloquent remarks, delivered just 11 weeks before he was assassinated, RFK pinpointed one of the reasons why we want to upload ethics into economics.
From Matthew, December 10, 2011:
As a macroeconomic indicator of well-being, GDP is lousy. We need to measure what matters.
You’re absolutely right. We’re currently drafting the script for an Econ4 video on “Measuring the Economy” – and looking for funding to produce it.
From Miles, November 28, 2011:
What is the difference between what you propose and communism?
Gee, red-baiting is so last century. But we’re glad you asked. Check out our mission statement where we set out Econ4’s four necessary conditions for a healthy economy:
1. A level playing field.
3. True-cost pricing.
4. Real democracy.
Doesn’t sound like actually existing communism. Or like actually existing capitalism. If those were the only two choices, economics really would be a dismal science. They aren’t, and it doesn’t have to be.
From Ben, November 28, 2011:
Make more videos. Your audience is waiting.
Thanks, Ben. That’s exactly what we want to do. We are now seeking funding to make it possible.
From Jody, November 25, 2011:
I love your website. Thanks so much for making this possible. One small comment is it that I think it would help your argument to include the titles for the individuals involved. You are building an argument that will benefit from either ‘Dr.’ at the front or ‘PhD’ at the end.
Thanks, Jody. You’ve put your finger on a dilemma. It’s important for those of us with PhD’s in economics to make use of our authority to affirm that another economics is possible. But we don’t want to imply in any way, shape or form that economics is only for the credentialed. So we take the untitled road.