It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
As a quick overview of this, Reinhart-Rogoff is one of the core studies underpinning pro-austerity arguments. But there are problems. Problems like missing Excel data, which is an error required to actually come up with the results that were published. There is also exclusion of certain areas of data, like Australia (1946-1950). Long story short, economic policy got screwed up.
Comments
I thought the (so-called) "Austrian" economics people didn't trust studies? Or something like that.
From what I've seen, a couple of Austrian proponents on the 'Net, their attitude can get pretty self-defeating.
So...
"This study proves that studies are useless!"
@glennmagusharvey I think Reinhart and Rogoff are more neoclassical, which means they take the social science equivalent of the spherical cow way too seriously.
Austrians, on the other hand, take a Hitchhiker's Guide approach to economics: if reality contradicts Austrian economics, then reality is obviously wrong.
That example I spoke of was pretty much that, the guy explicitly said he isn't going to regard research. That said, from what I know of him, Hayek was pretty far from this kind of fappery.
But don't you get it, Austrian economics is about how economics SHOULD work, not how it DOES work.
It's like you don't read Moldbug.
I don't read Moldbug, but otherwise I get the joke.