On #WorldMentalHealthDay, we thought we’d take a look at one of the best-known economics textbooks, Greg Mankiw’s Principles of Economics, to see how the discipline treats mental health archive.org/details/n.-gre…
There are many links between mental health and economics. Mental health can be impacted by peoples’ working situation, their level of income, and the state of the macroeconomy. Similarly, mental health can impact productivity, well-being, and other economic outcomes.
Unfortunately, there are barely any mentions of ‘mental health’ Mankiw’s textbook: just 1 by our count. The term ‘anxiety’ is not used and the ‘depression’ is largely used in the economic sense of the term. This contrasts with healthcare in general, which is discussed frequently.
One section which mentions mental health is this box by Tyler Cowen on the social influence of economic downturns. However, it is only mentioned in passing amidst a smorgasbord of social and cultural dynamics during recessions.
While introductory textbooks have to limit their scope, it seems fair to ask for more than a mention of mental health given its importance and its increasing recognition in the discipline. Discussions could easily be integrated with the numerous discussions of physical health.
Attached is the box in question
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
With the recent Nobel Prize in economics going to Ben Bernanke, Douglas Diamond and Philip Dybvig, who “have significantly improved our understanding of the role of banks in the economy, particularly during financial crises”, we thought we’d comment on their findings.
It’s positive that the mainstream of the profession is paying more attention to financial crises in general. Models of bank runs and historical studies of crises can be valuable tools in our arsenal if we want to understand and prevent catastrophic economic fluctuations.
Bernanke’s work on bank collapses during the Great Depression was worthwhile research which informed his response to the Great Recession in 2008. He knew the Federal Reserve had been too contractionary in the 1930s, so he was aggressive in responding to the 2008 crisis.
If you draw a donut, you make two circles: one large on the outside and one smaller on the inside. The outer circle represents the boundaries of the planet; the inner circle shows the basic human needs to live good lives.
According to this argument, society must adapt to the donut's juicy cake batter: we must not shoot outside the planet's boundaries (overshoot). At the same time, we must make sure that no one falls into the hole in the middle of the donut (shortfall).
Who produces money is a hotly contested issue within economics. You can find more information on this from our Rethinking the Role of Banks campaign: rethinkeconomics.org/journal/open-l…
Modern Monetary Theory? Not something that you have heard during the climate talks? Take a look at the arguments for: tribunemag.co.uk/2019/06/for-mmt