It’s nice to have supported opinions but those don’t quite rise to the evidence of body of research that has well established cause and effects, identified relationships between a variety of behaviour, and sustained truth over history, in a variety of conditions and notable exceptions. That’s economics.
The non-economic objection, the consistency of Paul’s positions is used to suggest blind allegiance, dead ends, one sidedness, insufficiency. The logical alternative is truth, presented consistently, like a doctor who has 100s of flu patients and makes the same diagnosis. Right is not diminished when repeated.
The abuse of people and environment through greed and selfishness (an a desire for wealth and power) also calls–cries!–for a way out of an economic crisis not connected to an immediate shift in world view. And that’s the purpose of economics, to offer a solution free of social values, one modeled on underlying relationships within all forms of social organization and thinking. Economics should work in Brasil, Estonia, China, Ghana, Norway, and Canada, whatever the folly of governments, individuals, or the level of development or the demand for services. The fact that there are universal principles, identified relationships, and conclusions for practices in economics is no reason to surrender the moral front. We do need a change of heart. But the moral and social issues we face are no reason to turn from the solutions economics can offer even as we change.