1206 PONTIFICIAE ACADEMIAE SCIENTIARVM SCRIPTA VARIA - ZC 
1) First, as I already stressed on the first day of this meeting, 
I think econometrics should remain neutral, i.e. we must avoid intro- 
ducing political views into our discussions. Personally, I would say 
that I am a neoliberal, but I think political views should remain 
outside the technical discussion of econometric problems. I do not 
accept at all that Prof. FRISCH’s paper can be regarded in any way 
as specifying the main lines of the future of econometrics. Econo- 
metrics is a very powerful tool of analysis but nothing more. In 
itself, it cannot determine what economic policy should be, but only 
analyze observations and derive, in a rigorous way, the consequences 
of specified hypotheses. Had Professor FriscH said in his paper: 
« I admit as hypotheses, first, that a competitive system cannot rea- 
lize the « high goals of rapid expansion, growth, and social justice, 
and second that these goals can be effectively realized in a central 
planned economy », I would not have said anything because from a 
scientific point of view, it is always possible and legitimate to make 
hypotheses and to discuss the results. But instead Professor Friscu 
has spoken of these two hypotheses as if they were well established 
‘acts. 
Econometrics must remain limited to the discussion of technical 
questions. Certainly it is possible and admissible to discuss scienti- 
fically the consequences of hypothesis of a political nature, but it is 
necessary to avoid connecting them with political and ethical views 
and with value judgements. 
2) Professor FriscH spoke of the « simplicity » of the competitive 
system but, I think, the same judgment can also be made on 
FRISCH’s proposals for realizing justice and rapid growth, looking 
for example at the first lines of § 5.1 (page 5). 
Taking FriscH’s paper as a whole, I would say that things are 
much more complex than his paper makes them out to be, and I 
think we must be very cautious about all the statements made. As 
an illustration of this complexity I will put forward for discussion 
some very important questions on which it is evident that it is 
impossible to follow the FrISCH conclusions, 
I do not say that FriscH’s ideals should be criticised. On the 
“171 Frisch - pag. 10