尽管有了许多十分可靠的宏观经济模型,但是,没有一个模型能够满足把现实政策与各种可以替代的政策进行评价这一十分苛刻的要求。即使模型能够做到这一点,也没有理由相信选民们会赞成把各种影响分摊到不同的结果组合之中。作为替代,我们可以提出两种问题。第一,既不考虑初始的条件(从上一届执政者承袭下来的局面),也不考虑意外事件(外部影响)对结果的影响,如何比较战后历届政府的政策效果?哪一届政府最好?哪一届政府最糟?第二,消费者(选民们)认为什么样的政策效果最为重要?当然,还有一个有趣的附加问题,对政策效果评价的方式是否与选民们所表现的偏好方式相同? Despite many highly reliable macroeconomic models, none of these models meets the very stringent requirement of evaluating realistic policies and alternative policies. Even if the model can do that, there is no reason to believe that voters would be in favor of apportioning the various effects into different combinations of outcomes. As an alternative, we can ask two questions. First, it does not consider the initial conditions (inherited from the previous governors), and also does not consider the impact of unexpected events (external influences) on the results. How can we compare the policy effects of successive post-war governments? Which government What is the best? Which government is the worst? Second, what kind of policy is most important to consumers (voters)? Of course, there is an interesting additional question whether the effect of the policy is evaluated against the behavior of the voters The same way of preference?