Geoffrey Wood is Emeritus Professor of Economics at City University Business School, London, and Emeritus Professor of Monetary Economics at the University of Buckingham. He has also taught at the University of Warwick, and been on the research staff of the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis. He has published extensively in the areas of monetary economics and international economics. Among these publications are Too Much Money? , with Gordon Pepper (IEA, 1975); Independence for the Bank of England? , with Forrest Capie and Terry Mills (IEA, 1993); The Right Road to Monetary Union Revisited , with John Chown and Max Beber (IEA, 1994); and Money Over Two Centuries: Selected Topics in British Monetary History (Oxford University Press, 2012), comprising work with Forrest Capie and others, written over a period of some twenty years. His recent research has been on central bank independence and on regulation. He is a member of the Academic Advisory Council of the Institute of Economic Affairs and a trustee of the Wincott Foundation.
Foreword
It is often said that economics is applied common sense. Unfortunately, as I remember the man who owned the local bicycle shop saying to me when I was a child, the problem with common sense is that it is not common enough. And so it is that the demand for this monograph by Geoffrey Wood, Fifty Economic Fallacies Exposed , never seems to decrease.
I was delighted that Professor Wood agreed to update this publication to allow the IEA to publish a new edition. A few old fallacies have been removed to make room for new ones (though, no doubt, the old ones will become relevant again in the future). But, as the author said to me, all the fallacies are essentially the same. They arise from an inability of people to understand supply and demand (and, by implication, opportunity cost).
Henry Simons once said: Economics is primarily useful, both to the student and to the political leader, as a prophylactic against popular fallacies. Through the vehicle of undermining fallacies, Professor Wood brings to his audience good economics. As such, this new edition of Fifty Economic Fallacies Exposed is an important contribution to the IEAs educational mission.
The views expressed in this monograph are, as in all IEA publications, those of the author and not those of the Institute (which has no corporate view), its managing trustees, Academic Advisory Council members or senior staff. With some exceptions, such as with the publication of lectures, all IEA monographs are blind peer-reviewed by at least two academics or researchers who are experts in the field.
Philip Booth
Editorial and Programme Director
Institute of Economic Affairs
Professor of Insurance and Risk Management
Cass Business School, City University, London
July 2014
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to the late Arthur Seldon, who was Editor of Economic Affairs when I first proposed a regular feature exposing economic fallacies, both for accepting my suggestion and for his ever useful editorial advice. Second, many thanks go to his successor, Colin Robinson, for continuing the feature and for his most helpful suggestions of fallacies to expose and of improvements to what I had written. Third, my colleague Forrest Capie deserves thanks for over the years drawing to my attention a good number of fallacies to discuss, and giving very useful comments on drafts. Fourth, and most important, my thanks go to my assistant Debra Durston. Mrs Durston worked with me for over 25 years with continual efficiency and unshakable good humour. Her contribution to all my work over the years has been considerable. I am particularly glad to be able to acknowledge it here, in a book to which, by her calmness under pressure, she has contributed so much.
Thanks are also due to Joe Little, of the University of Bristol, who helped with the selection of fallacies to be included in this revised edition.
Introduction
Each of the short essays in this volume comprises the application of basic economic analysis and logic to a frequently repeated but fallacious belief about one aspect or another of the economy. Occasional reference is made to an item of data, but that is always simply to illustrate a point; the argument never depends on data, but always on logic.
The essays aim to serve two purposes to illustrate aspects of economic reasoning, and to expose wrong, occasionally counterproductively or even dangerously wrong, arguments. The topics are drawn from both micro-economics and macro-economics. But in every case the reasoning applied to them is either explicitly micro-economic or clearly derived from micro-economics. This reflects the fact that micro-economics, the analysis of firms and individuals interacting in markets, is the basis of all economic analysis.
Part 1. Regulation and markets
Ticket touts are harmful and wicked. They should be stamped out by law
There is an idea about that being a ticket tout is in some unexplained way disreputable, and that those who deal with them, whether buying or selling, are disgracing themselves and their associates. One cannot refute a moral judgement by logic. It is not a matter of economics. But what economics can do is to show that ticket touts are useful, and that they provide a service to both seller and buyer. There is absolutely no case for making their activities illegal.
To see this, think about what a ticket tout does. And just for the moment, we shall not call what he trades in tickets we shall call them the item.
Some person has a supply of the item surplus to what he wants. The item does not keep for ever indeed, after a certain date it becomes useless. He can do several things with it give it away, not use it (and thus let it go to waste), or he can sell it. If he wants to sell it, there are many methods open to him; but a very convenient one is to find someone who deals in the item, and is willing to buy it with the aim of reselling it, but bearing the risk that he may fail. The original possessor of the item, who is not a professional dealer, is willing to sell for a little less than he might receive from the final consumer in return for someone else bearing the risk of not selling the item.