<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve already discussed state university taxpayer funding for the research of economists, many of whom ironically then tout the benefits of unfettered free markets and the inefficiencies of taxpayer subsidies. </p>
<p>But we can take it one step further. Most of the national statistical data that serves as the evidentiary raw material with which to publish econometric journal papers and calibrate macroeconomic models is funded by the taxpayers. The Economics and Statistics Administration (ESA), National Technical Information Service (NTIS), and the Bureau of the Census are all taxpayer funded institutions. Indeed, most of the empirical and modeling research that invokes the more politically conservative, free-market-oriented notions such as rational expectations and RBC itself utilizes data provided by one of the government statistical bodies. Practically all empirical economists, including those at private universities and think tanks, utilize this data to advance their theories. If the government did not pay to collect and publish this data, then pray tell, who would? Would there really be some private organization that would spring forth that would provide the information necessary to accurately calculate even such basic economic measurements as GDP, let alone the various multipliers, elasticities, and structural parameters necessary to build macro models? Color me skeptical.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I suppose you could argue that data and empirical evidence simply don’t matter when it comes to economic research. But then I would ask how exactly do you know that any of the economic concepts you like to cite are actually empirically valid?</p>