Om fakta og føleri i økonomidebatten

The recent debate on NRK between economists, most from the financial sector, and three political leaders—Sylvi Listhaug from The Progress Party, Trygve Slagsvold Vedum from The Centre Party, and Marie Sneve Martinussen from The Red—centered on whether most Norwegians have received better advice. This topic has garnered significant reactions.

According to an article in E24, economists claim that politicians “from the extreme right to the extreme left” have undermined economists, accusing them of “denying a fact-based description” and casting doubt on their integrity. A major reason for polarizing conflicts is humans’ inherent weakness for absolute statements. Addressing nuances is more challenging.

However, to avoid polarization, it may be beneficial to qualify all three statements. An E24 article cites Martinussen’s allegation that economists at the debate claimed what they did because they work in the financial sector, which implies questioning their professional integrity. Neither Vedum nor Listhaug endorsed this view. Politicians primarily responded to Martinussen’s accusations, offering primarily nuanced perspectives.

Notably, economists reported that average prosperity and standard of living have grown in recent years and are at a very high level in Norway. Few doubt this. Nonetheless, these averages obscure important nuances. For instance, a study by Endre Jo Reite, a senior analyst at NTNU, found that families with children who own homes saw their purchasing power reduced by 2,600 kroner per month between 2021 and 2025.

Single mothers' average purchasing power fell by 3,500 kroner, after accounting for interest rate increases, which obviously burdens these groups. This analysis formed the basis of Listhaug's first rebuttal: "The fact is that many with large loans, common among middle-class families, have received poorer advice in recent years."

This rebuttal was followed by a concrete example of a single mother. Revealing such examples does not mean denying a fact-based description; rather, it qualifies and expands the fact description provided by economists. E24 quotes chief economist Frank Jullum, who reported that economists were met with "almost blackmail." The difference lay between politicians.

Both Martinussen and Vedum must answer for their statements, but Listhaug stated that economists live "their lives in a ledger." While the extent of the blackmail in this claim is debatable, most participants in the public debate who are deeply engaged like senior economists likely tolerate it well. The Fremskrittspartiet (The Progress Party) generally tolerates accusations from Jullum, despite believing Jullum was unbalanced here.

Significant agreement exists that polarization is a major problem in societal debate. A key source of this polarization is precisely the lack of nuances. Most of us should improve our ability to qualify statements. This applies to many politicians and many senior economists.