Thanks for the comment. You are right, in that every job is an “output” job. Obviously, if Dr. Yun shows, over time, a lack of accuracy, then he should be dismissed. Your article about NFL officiating applies to Dr. Yun in that coaches are a lot like any other type of critic– they either love you or hate you, but on their own terms. What makes one official desirable to one coach doesn’t necessarily work well for another coach. Economists and sports officials both interpret data and offer judgment. Sometimes those judgments are right, sometimes, not so so much. Both groups know that they won’t get it right every time, it just isn’t possible. It is the dedication to getting it right that separates the best officials (and economists) from the rest. Time will tell what Dr. Yun’s dedication is, but my first impression was a positive one.

On another note, before you start banging on the quality of a guy’s education, you should probably run your comment through the ol’ grammar/usage/spell-check engine; or, at least, share your own qualifications. Just sayin’.

Lawrence Yun is to economics as Gerald Austin is to NFL officiating. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3447256 His “tough calls” have been consistently and obviously wrong to the point that if he were a ref, his commissioner probably would have replaced him at halftime.

Your comparisons beyond that are terrible. Focusing only on data collection and completing ignoring the validity of the models applied to that data is like doing an expose on a NASCAR mechanic and then expecting his or her car to win with a 5-year old in the driver’s seat.

The government doesn’t contact a Maryland-College Park grad for his theories about how the market is doing; they contact him for raw data, and leave the application of models to independent, Ivy League educated economists who actually know what they’re doing.

It’s bad enough when Yun is duping the general public. It’s even worse when he starts duping his own trade association.