Was LeFevre Interested in Economics?

Re this post by Jeffrey Tucker at blog.Mises.org:

Introduction to Lift Her Up, Tenderly

This is a textbook. It is designed to serve as the scaffolding around which a course in basic economics can be provided for students. Educators may possibly view it as a novel. Certainly, it is novel to discover a text about economics which contains human drama and emotion. The text is interesting. That contradicts all prior theories about economics.

Ever since Carlyle thundered his melancholy maledictions against the "gloomy science," scholars have reacted as though Carlyle were right. I think he was wrong. Without realizing it, Carlyle was probably reacting against the way economics is usually taught. If so, I can readily understand his pessimism and find myself equally uninspired.

All economic ideas are basically simple. That, in itself, may provide part of the difficulty economists have concerning the teaching of those ideas. After all, an economist is a human being and wishes to be respected and admired. How much respect and admiration will he engender if it is discovered that the course he teaches is so fundamentally simple that even children will readily understand it? Few persons holding doctoral degrees could attract the awe of the uninformed by interpreting Mother Goose.

In more than twenty years of studying and teaching economics, I have usually found that economic ideas which are really little more than common sense have been cloaked in such profundity that the discipline appears to be esoteric, abstruse, and far too difficult for the average adult to fully comprehend. However, if one will persist in probing the pedants who have constructed the most obtuse and convoluted definitions, one emerges finally with the realization that economics is something which could be taught in grade and high schools, while the student is quite young.

Let me provide an example. One economist has been receiving public recognition for his discovery of "demonstrated preference." Doesn't that sound impressive? What does it mean? It means that people often tell you something but act in a contrary manner. The point is that "actions speak louder than words," the old adage that anybody can understand. But who, without an interpreter, will immediately grasp that the ponderous, obfuscatory statement which sets forth the principle of "demonstration of preferences" means the same thing?

Then we have the earth-shaking theory of "marginal utility." This is such an important discovery that when it was first introduced, it virtually revolutionized the classic approach to economics. What it means is that people tend to favor those useful things which are most difficult to get. That could be summed up as "Easy come, easy go" plus "Hard to come by, bitter to lose." I did that last one myself because adages are fairly easy to construct and anyone can readily grasp the meaning.

In the United States, for many years emphasis has been placed on the physical sciences, technologies of various sorts, and supportive disciplines. The humanities and social studies have been either downgraded or construed into a kind of political format which virtually demands that the growing child submit all his problems to democratic decision-making. Before the youngster graduates from the grades, he has come to believe that he can get anything he wants if only he is popular enough and has a following. The verities of life are replaced by the processes of balloting. The values that make life worth living are shunted aside in favor of arrogant or submissive assurance that the numbers game governs all.

The formal teaching of economics has, unfortunately, tended to pursue this same direction. I am not seeking to downgrade or decry the importance of mathematical data nor the obvious usefulness of mathematical probabilities. What I am seeking to emphasize is that human values and common sense must take precedence. The basics ought to be taught to young people. And they should be taught in the home and in the early years in school. After such a foundation is laid, there's time enough for the computer.

Lift Her Up, Tenderly is pure fiction. A man in his fifties is the guardian of a twelve-year-old girl. The situations and dialogue are entirely imaginary. But the laws of economics (common sense) are suggested by the guardian and applied by the young lady in her efforts to deal with real life situations. I was influenced in preparing this text by my own experience in which I acted as an unofficial guardian for a young lady. Yes, there is a real Virginia.

My hope is that teachers will make use of this simple approach to economics and offer it as a course of study to young people in high school, or even in the grades.

Even more importantly, I hope that in its pages parents will rediscover the exciting and rewarding task of teaching their own children. Love alone is not enough. Physical maintenance, paying the bills, playing together -- none of these is enough. Learning the meaning and common sense of living is a life-long challenge for parents and children alike.

To the young people who may read these pages, I would urge patience. Your parents really do love you. They may or may not be technically skilled, they may or may not be rich, or famous, or applauded, but the living of life contains great values that can never be found by measuring and computing, by tallying votes, or by popularity contests. And you have many things to teach them, too. The learning process is always mutual.

Bob LeFevre
California, 1976