James Kwak

James Kwak
James Kwak is a professor of law at the University of Connecticut School of Law and the vice chair of the Southern Center for Human Rights. He is the author of Economism: Bad Economics and the Rise of Inequality.
  • The Curse of Econ 101, Cont’d

    A striking fast-food worker holds up a sign during protests to support raising the minimum wage in Los Angeles, California, on November 29, 2016. Lucy Nicholson / Reuters

    In January, James Kwak wrote about how basic economic principles can be applied to public policy in misleading ways. A letter to the editor, followed by James’s reply, is below.

    Thanks to Professor Kwak for his 2017 article in The Atlantic entitled “The Curse of Econ 101.”  We participated in a discussion of this article in a recent economics conference, and it served as an excellent launching pad for our reflections on the pros and cons of our Principles of Economics courses as currently taught.

    Those in attendance teach Economics at research universities, liberal-arts colleges and community colleges, and we agreed that we did not recognize our Principles courses in the description of Economism advanced by Professor Kwak. He defines Economism as “the misleading application of basic lessons from Economics 101 to real-world problems, creating the illusion of consensus and reducing a complex topic to a simple, open-and-shut case.” While we do not count upon reaching consensus among our students, we do make every effort to give them a fundamental theoretical structure that they can extend as appropriate when evaluating real-world problems. We then present them with those real-world problems and demand that they analyze the specifics of those problems using the theoretical structure of economics.

    The presentation of the minimum wage in our classes—Professor Kwak’s specific example—is a good example of the appropriate mix of theory and real-world experience in our classes. We do not ask our students to ignore empirical observations that seem to contradict our theory, but we use those observations as jumping-off points to consider appropriate extensions of the theory in that specific case. Professor Kwak cites a 1994 study by professors David Card and Alan Krueger as a reason to reject the insights of Economics 101 on the minimum wage; we see it and the many other empirical studies of the impact of the minimum wage as ways to engage students in extending their application of economic theory to the real world.

    We enjoyed Professor Kwak’s point of view, and look forward to reading his book. In the meantime, we hope that he’ll sit through a semester of Econ 101 on his campus. We think he’ll find that the class challenges the students to extend their thinking to embrace complex economic phenomena rather than encouraging them to treat each phenomenon as a “simple, open-and-shut case.”


    Patrick Conway
    Professor, Department of Economics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

    William Alpert
    Emeritus Professor, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut

    Carlos J. Asarta
    Director, Center for Economic Education and Entrepreneurship, University of Delaware

    Steven Cobb
    Director, Center for Economic Education, University of North Texas

    William Goffe
    Senior Lecturer, Department of Economics, Penn State University

    Michael A. MacDowell
    Managing Director, Calvin K. Kazanjian Economics Foundation, Inc.

    Michael Salemi
    Emeritus Professor, Department of Economics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

    Wendy Stock
    Professor, Agricultural Economics and Economics Departments, Montana State University

    John Swinton
    Professor, Department of Economics, Georgia College

    James Kwak replies:

    I appreciate your reading the article (which is an excerpt of my book Economism), and I’m honored that your group chose to discuss it.

    I am sure you are correct that most first-year economics classes do not blindly apply the competitive market model to complex issues. In the article and the book, my focus was not on first-year economics classes themselves, but rather on a broader social phenomenon: the unreflective way that the competitive market model is used to justify certain policy and political positions (often with a ritual invocation of “Economics 101”) without asking whether the model accurately describes the real world. My book is concerned less with how economics is actually taught than with our media and political landscape and the caricature of Economics 101 that, in my opinion, has become disproportionately influential today. When it comes to the minimum wage, my main point was not to say that Dube is right and Neumark and Wascher are wrong, but to say that there is a serious empirical debate about these issues; the people who are wrong are the politicians who say with certainty that a higher minimum wage must increase unemployment, and they are the ones who claim that “economics” is on their side.

    I do hope you read the book.

  • Bettmann / Getty

    The Curse of Econ 101

    When it comes to basic policy questions such as the minimum wage, introductory economics can be more misleading than it is helpful.

  • Shannon Stapleton / Reuters

    The Perfectly Normal Ways Trump Can Enrich Himself as President

    The president-elect's control over conventional economic policy could be worth more money than any conflict of interest.

  • Bryan Woolston / Reuters

    The Tax Code for the Ultra-Rich vs. the One for Everyone Else

    It’s as though there’s a separate set of laws for people with extreme amounts of wealth.

  • Lucy Nicholson / Reuters

    California's Smart New Retirement Plan and the Industry That Opposes It

    Many asset-management companies fear a program that would reduce something they depend on: consumers’ confusion.

  • Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

    The Difficult Math of American Health Care

    It’s not just Aetna: The way Obamacare handles the excessive costs of treatment simply doesn’t work.

  • Scott Morgan / Reuters

    Hillary Clinton’s Weak Plans for Changing Wall Street

    She’s proposing tweaks when it needs an overhaul.

  • Carolyn Kaster/AP

    The Rich, the Poor, and Whether Tax Policies Live or Die

    Obama's failed proposal to eliminate 529 plans illustrates the current state of American taxation: Reforms that benefit the middle class at the expense of the wealthy will never pass.

  • Nabil Rahman/ProPublica

    How Not to Regulate

    This past weekend's This American Life/ProPublica report confirms the worst of what many already suspected: The New York Fed has little independence from the industry it is supposed to control.

  • Reuters

    Why Is Credit Suisse Still Allowed to Do Business in the United States?

    The conventional wisdom is that revoking a large bank’s license can trigger potential systemic consequences. But that's not the case here.

  • Reuters

    Why Won't Washington Take on Wall Street's Biggest Crimes?

    The Justice Department has successfully convicted dozens of bankers for insider trading. But the big banks did something much worse and got away with it.

  • Reuters

    Bitcoin and the Myth of Tech Utopia

    The belief that every human problem can be solved with software forgets the human element inside all software.

  • Silicon Valley's Paydays Are Outrageous—So, Where's the Outrage?

    Lavishing executives with $20 million—or $100 million—is pointless and wasteful, whether the CEOs live in the Financial District or Mountain View.

  • Reuters

    Jamie Dimon’s Original Sin: ‘America’s Best Banker’ Was Overrated From the Start

    The lesson of JP Morgan’s historic resilience (and, now, record fine) is that its leader turned out to be painfully mortal, all along

  • Reuters

    5 Years Later, We've Learned Nothing From the Financial Crisis

    Why haven't we destroyed the idea that destroyed the world?

  • Forget 'Fabulous Fab': Here's Why Wall Street's Biggest Fish Always Slip Away

    Behold the power of plausible deniability.

  • The Price of Safety: Why Cheap Regulation Creates Expensive Crises

    Do you want Boeing deciding if its airplanes are safe? Or JPMorgan deciding if its bets are sensible?

  • Washington's Backward Retirement Policy: So Wrong, and Yet So Easy to Fix

    We have more than enough money to protect Social Security. It's just going to the wrong people: private savers.

  • Don't Cut Social Security!

    Why reducing retirement benefits to pay down the deficit is a terrible idea

  • Your 401(k) Is Out to Get You

    Or, to be more precise, the mutual fund company that oversees your 401(k) plan is out to get you.