Where "Metrics" end

A general question is from reading these two articles on same topic

The New York Times

Opinion pages

Op-Ed Columnist

The Texas Omen

By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: January 6, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=1&WT.mc_id=OP-SM-E-FB-SM-LIN-TTO-010711-NYT-NA&WT.mc_ev=click

Economist

Texas and New York, different
Published: Jan 5th 2011, 18:13 by R.A. | WASHINGTON http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/01/regional_business_cycles?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/texasny

Is a particular economic approach winning if this "seems" to give some results in a limited area?

I guess that one analysis key could be to see what companies concentrated their investments on Texas and where "savings" were made to finance them (in USA and in other parts of the globe). This is highly value when we talk about multinational companies. The analysis of this aspect could give a "right" reply to the question (and meaning too) if Texas is different or not from New York or other areas… If you are not able to give a reply to this question, all discussion could be inconsistent and interested…

Another topic exists on this reflection.  Could a single limited area be used to test and prove that a general economic theory is true and works?

In this question there is an entire subset of additional questions that should be checked before to enter in this experiment.

Some examples could be:
What are the elements that drove investments on this area?
Are these elements preexisting to what...?
Could the replication of these elements possible in other areas?
Who had driven their creation or who could drive this process?
Where are the "sources" of these?
Are they limited or unlimited"?
Are they local, regional or global?
What was and is the economic, financial and social cost and impact?
What was the economic approach that drove?
What was the economic, financial and social cost and impact produced in other areas and in the rest of the planet?


Written on Jan 6, 2011