ABSTRACT
Economics has been called the dismal science. To a certain degree, macro-economics, as a subdiscipline, can be blamed for this. The central message of macroeconomics is not a popular one among either citizens or economists from other subfields. And this is so for at least two reasons. On the one hand, macroeconomics plays the role of the Freudian superego: its most important task is to tell us what should not be done. On the other hand, the results of following macroeconomists’ advice can be particularly disappointing: macroeconomic equilibrium itself, once achieved, does not guarantee economic development.
