| All rights reserved. |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
Joy Today art columnist, Jess Genevieve Bailey, wrote this essay for her AP
Economics class and sent it to us for the magazine. Per the Money issue, here is
Jess Genevieve's essay!
AP Economics – Great Economist Essay
Jess Genevieve Bailey
“Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" (what is seen and what is not seen)
A poor economist is one who only sees the visible. A good economist is one who foresees the
invisible. But it is only the great economist who voices aloud this distinction of sight and
foresight within the profession of monetarily minded philosophers and mathematically inclined
historians. Frederic Bastiat, a literately amusing Frenchman observed as much. Furthermore he
demonstrated with remarkable simplicity the above declaration regarding his fellow
economists using merely a broken window as his assistant. Written in 1850 the pamphlet
entitled, “What Is Seen and What is not Seen,” presents the best case for not only the
explanation of Opportunity Cost, but also, perhaps more importantly, for responsible and
complete economic thinking.
Frederic Bastiat was first and foremost one of the few economists who could truly write. With
spirit and creativity he made a literary quest for exposing fallacies. Living in post Napoleonic
France facing the revolts and the fracturing stability in the years preceding and following 1848,
Bastiat joined, and journalistically lead, the post-Adam Smith French advancement of Laissez-
Faire monetary philosophy. His companions in the movement were economic minds such as
Jean-Baptiste Say and Alexis de Tocqueville. “We have tried so many things, when shall we try
the simplest of all: freedom?” was his response to socialistic splatterings and spluterings in his
homeland. Bastiat continued his outspoken campaigns in his Libre `Enchange journal along
with his formation of a national free trade association headquartered in Paris. However,
Bastiat’s lasting contribution to economics comes down to us star gazing students in the form of
two essays: “The Petition of the Candlemakers,” and what is commonly referenced as simply
“The Broken Window.” In turning our eye to Bastiat’s shattered glass perhaps we shall also be
fortunate enough to turn our minds onto the path towards greater economic thought.
In the 1850 pamphlet Frederic Bastiat informs us of an event. An unfortunate boy has
disfigured a set of windowpanes with a large brick that the glass is in a state of disrepair. The
community living around said window gathers for an examination. What do they see? A need
for a glazier. At first, being sorry for the owner of the now dysfunctional window, the body of
assembled eyes laments the monetary funds that he or she must now expend. However, a
revelation is soon reached. How would the glazier contribute to the economy if he did not
have broken windows to mend? The employment of unfortunate boys to gather bricks and
chuck them at windows must hence become popular. For such destruction would be
advantageous to the creation of business, the assembled individuals proclaim. They have
accurately examined what can be seen, Bastiat tells us. This community of onlookers has
observed the negative result of the window’s owner having to expend funds for repair and
they have concluded the positive result of the town glazier acquiring business. However, they
are poor economists, the author of our story states. In seeing only what is to be seen, they
have left out what must be foreseen, what is invisible to all but the great economist who has
cultivated completeness of thought and examination.
If the town assembly dedicated to this problem of an economically perplexing set of shattered
glass panes calls us, the learned society of young economists, to their aid what must we foresee
to complete its crippled economic thought? We must see what is not seen. If the owner of the
window must expend six francs for its repair to the glazier, he will not be able to pay say the
cobbler or the bookbinder that very amount for their services. If the same funds spent to
employ the glazier could have been spent to employ the cobbler, if only the window had not
been broken dispersing the funds so specifically, is then the employment of destruction-minded
boys in the town a benefit to the economy? No, we must conclude that destruction does not
create more business, Bastiat writes. For if the money had not been spent on the window’s
repair it could have been spent on something else, still providing business for another member
of the town’s economy. What is not seen at first then, because the issue of the window was
not approached with complete economic thinking, were the opportunities inherently lost in
giving the glazier the six francs. Bestiat has then demonstrated to his reader not only the
definition of Opportunity Cost, but that only through examining the seen and the unseen will
the true value of an immediate action be properly weighed in a market economy. This lesson
of complete economic thinking, in essence examining all sides of a question, is the nutrition by
which all great economists maintain and cultivate healthy ideas.
Frederic Bastiat was influenced by Adam Smith in his work, and contributed greatly to the
advancement of the free market philosophy. However, this core observation of his –“Ce qu'on
voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" (what is seen and what is not seen) – has been declared by some
as the fundamental lesson needing to be grasped by any great economist. Henry Hazlett, a
20th century economist and author of the best seller “Economics in One lesson,” states in
relation to Bastiat's work, that “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the
immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences
of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.” It then appears that if greatness is
sought, completeness of thought must guide one’s ascension. In a country grappling with
economic debate, that is at times both educated and ill understood, both infused with personal
passion and clouded by national politics, we must perhaps hold Bastiat’s lesson of thorough
examination close to our academic minds and flighty human hearts. What is the Opportunity
Cost of taxation for the individual citizen? What is the Opportunity Cost of nationalized
healthcare for our country? These are question that have statistical answers, philosophical
answers, and political answers. However, the great economist will answer such important
monetary questions of our time by looking with open eyes and conducting advantageous self-
restraint when voicing aloud assumptions until a complete examination has been reached. If
we can at least aspire to such a standard of high thoroughness of foresight, Frederic Bastiat
would no doubt declare us at least good economists for the time being.
***
Bibliography
Bastiat, Frederic. Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas (What is Seen and What is Not Seen).
Pamphlet, France, 1850.
Buchholz, Todd G. New Ideas From Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic
Thought. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc, 1989.
Hazlitt, Henry. Economics in One Lesson. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1979.
Heilbroner, Robert L. The Worldly Philosophers: The Lives, Times, And Ideas of Great Economic
Thinkers. 7th Ed. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999.
Skouren, Mark. The Making of Modern Economics: The Lives and Ideas of the Great Thinkers.
London: M.E. Sharpe, 2001.
Economics class and sent it to us for the magazine. Per the Money issue, here is
Jess Genevieve's essay!
AP Economics – Great Economist Essay
Jess Genevieve Bailey
“Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" (what is seen and what is not seen)
A poor economist is one who only sees the visible. A good economist is one who foresees the
invisible. But it is only the great economist who voices aloud this distinction of sight and
foresight within the profession of monetarily minded philosophers and mathematically inclined
historians. Frederic Bastiat, a literately amusing Frenchman observed as much. Furthermore he
demonstrated with remarkable simplicity the above declaration regarding his fellow
economists using merely a broken window as his assistant. Written in 1850 the pamphlet
entitled, “What Is Seen and What is not Seen,” presents the best case for not only the
explanation of Opportunity Cost, but also, perhaps more importantly, for responsible and
complete economic thinking.
Frederic Bastiat was first and foremost one of the few economists who could truly write. With
spirit and creativity he made a literary quest for exposing fallacies. Living in post Napoleonic
France facing the revolts and the fracturing stability in the years preceding and following 1848,
Bastiat joined, and journalistically lead, the post-Adam Smith French advancement of Laissez-
Faire monetary philosophy. His companions in the movement were economic minds such as
Jean-Baptiste Say and Alexis de Tocqueville. “We have tried so many things, when shall we try
the simplest of all: freedom?” was his response to socialistic splatterings and spluterings in his
homeland. Bastiat continued his outspoken campaigns in his Libre `Enchange journal along
with his formation of a national free trade association headquartered in Paris. However,
Bastiat’s lasting contribution to economics comes down to us star gazing students in the form of
two essays: “The Petition of the Candlemakers,” and what is commonly referenced as simply
“The Broken Window.” In turning our eye to Bastiat’s shattered glass perhaps we shall also be
fortunate enough to turn our minds onto the path towards greater economic thought.
In the 1850 pamphlet Frederic Bastiat informs us of an event. An unfortunate boy has
disfigured a set of windowpanes with a large brick that the glass is in a state of disrepair. The
community living around said window gathers for an examination. What do they see? A need
for a glazier. At first, being sorry for the owner of the now dysfunctional window, the body of
assembled eyes laments the monetary funds that he or she must now expend. However, a
revelation is soon reached. How would the glazier contribute to the economy if he did not
have broken windows to mend? The employment of unfortunate boys to gather bricks and
chuck them at windows must hence become popular. For such destruction would be
advantageous to the creation of business, the assembled individuals proclaim. They have
accurately examined what can be seen, Bastiat tells us. This community of onlookers has
observed the negative result of the window’s owner having to expend funds for repair and
they have concluded the positive result of the town glazier acquiring business. However, they
are poor economists, the author of our story states. In seeing only what is to be seen, they
have left out what must be foreseen, what is invisible to all but the great economist who has
cultivated completeness of thought and examination.
If the town assembly dedicated to this problem of an economically perplexing set of shattered
glass panes calls us, the learned society of young economists, to their aid what must we foresee
to complete its crippled economic thought? We must see what is not seen. If the owner of the
window must expend six francs for its repair to the glazier, he will not be able to pay say the
cobbler or the bookbinder that very amount for their services. If the same funds spent to
employ the glazier could have been spent to employ the cobbler, if only the window had not
been broken dispersing the funds so specifically, is then the employment of destruction-minded
boys in the town a benefit to the economy? No, we must conclude that destruction does not
create more business, Bastiat writes. For if the money had not been spent on the window’s
repair it could have been spent on something else, still providing business for another member
of the town’s economy. What is not seen at first then, because the issue of the window was
not approached with complete economic thinking, were the opportunities inherently lost in
giving the glazier the six francs. Bestiat has then demonstrated to his reader not only the
definition of Opportunity Cost, but that only through examining the seen and the unseen will
the true value of an immediate action be properly weighed in a market economy. This lesson
of complete economic thinking, in essence examining all sides of a question, is the nutrition by
which all great economists maintain and cultivate healthy ideas.
Frederic Bastiat was influenced by Adam Smith in his work, and contributed greatly to the
advancement of the free market philosophy. However, this core observation of his –“Ce qu'on
voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" (what is seen and what is not seen) – has been declared by some
as the fundamental lesson needing to be grasped by any great economist. Henry Hazlett, a
20th century economist and author of the best seller “Economics in One lesson,” states in
relation to Bastiat's work, that “The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the
immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences
of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups.” It then appears that if greatness is
sought, completeness of thought must guide one’s ascension. In a country grappling with
economic debate, that is at times both educated and ill understood, both infused with personal
passion and clouded by national politics, we must perhaps hold Bastiat’s lesson of thorough
examination close to our academic minds and flighty human hearts. What is the Opportunity
Cost of taxation for the individual citizen? What is the Opportunity Cost of nationalized
healthcare for our country? These are question that have statistical answers, philosophical
answers, and political answers. However, the great economist will answer such important
monetary questions of our time by looking with open eyes and conducting advantageous self-
restraint when voicing aloud assumptions until a complete examination has been reached. If
we can at least aspire to such a standard of high thoroughness of foresight, Frederic Bastiat
would no doubt declare us at least good economists for the time being.
***
Bibliography
Bastiat, Frederic. Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas (What is Seen and What is Not Seen).
Pamphlet, France, 1850.
Buchholz, Todd G. New Ideas From Dead Economists: An Introduction to Modern Economic
Thought. New York: Penguin Books USA Inc, 1989.
Hazlitt, Henry. Economics in One Lesson. New York: Three Rivers Press, 1979.
Heilbroner, Robert L. The Worldly Philosophers: The Lives, Times, And Ideas of Great Economic
Thinkers. 7th Ed. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999.
Skouren, Mark. The Making of Modern Economics: The Lives and Ideas of the Great Thinkers.
London: M.E. Sharpe, 2001.
Joy Today!
"A thing of beauty is a joy forever..."
-John Keats
"A thing of beauty is a joy forever..."
-John Keats