Re: CAMREC: The 'no supply-demand curve' sign

From: the Campaign for Real Economics (
Date: Tue Oct 17 2000 - 17:33:34 BST

  • Next message: the Campaign for Real Economics: "Re: CAMREC: The 'no supply-demand curve' sign"

    Received: by id TAA22082 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 19:02:01 +0100
    Message-Id: <>
    Precedence: bulk
    To: CAMREC list members <>
    From: the Campaign for Real Economics <>
    Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:33:34 -0500
    Subject: Re: CAMREC: The 'no supply-demand curve' sign

    At 03:56 PM 10/17/00 +0100, you wrote:
    >(The real reason for its invention is that we wanted to have a bit of

    That's good enough for me. :-) I've never liked the simple supply/demand

    I'm sitting here imaging taking an introductory economics class. When the
    teacher puts the first supply/demand curve up, I get up and point out that
    no one uses such a curve to make any decisions and no empirical data
    justifies the curve. The teacher then replies, 'you are right, but this is
    the best we can do for an approximation.' I've never known how to get past
    that reply.

    As I recollect, that is what my economics teacher told me 32 years ago when
    I asked that question at age 17. I doubt the answer has changed, but it
    has been a long time. What passes for an adequate justification for simple
    supply/demand curves these days?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 17 2000 - 19:02:02 BST