-
Milton Friedman gave written advice to the People's Republic of China, but this was under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping, a political pragmatist who was looking for ways to reform China's command economy along more capitalistic lines. It's not like Friedman's advice was being solicited by Kim Il-sung or Enver Hoxha.
-
[quote]who are these statists?[/quote] In my experience they're anyone who isn't an anarcho-capitalist. It's a silly little pejorative that I think is thrown around far more often than is necessary; it's like the Keynesian idea of "classical economics" being anybody who disagrees with the "new economics", or the Marxist
-
[quote]That seems kind of bonkers. Is the using a textbook? I can't think of any intro or intermediate macro book that teaches that way. It would be interesting to see why he deviates from the textbook's outline. [/quote] In my own experience the Philips curve was the final part of a general lesson on introductory monetary policy concepts. To
-
[quote]It's tricky mixing politics and religion; one's physical and one's metaphysical. The way I look at it either you base your interest in political theory and philosophy or religion, balancing them out is a pain in the ass.[/quote] I think that's why I would've ended up gravitating towards some sect of Marxism; I remember (and
-
You'll both spend most of your time talking past each other, I imagine; you're speaking different languages philosophically, economically, and ideologically.
-
My advice is going to be rather droll, but I'd recommend consulting someone in the financial industry, especially considering how large your bequeathment is.
-
Truth be told, if I hadn't discovered libertarianism and never developed an interest in economics then I'd probably be a Marxist (maybe a Leninist, definitely not a Stalinist). I tend to view things analytically by nature, and because my first academic love was history then I have no doubt that I'd naturally be drawn to dialecticalism (being
-
[quote]I understand the basic idea of Pareto Efficiency, but I'm not certain how it applies in the way you're using it here.[/quote] If sticky wages and correspondingly a higher level of unemployment are results of the market then forcing movements away from this scenario are Pareto inefficient because they would benefit one set of market agents
-
Neodoxy, In a market where all aggressive intervention is absent, wouldn't a situation where sticky wages/prices/interest rates/et al. persist be a product of voluntary human interaction? If so, wouldn't it be inefficient from a Pareto standpoint to try and increase total spending in an effort to reverse this state of affairs?
-
Could someone please explain to me why this is so controversial? I'm not being sarcastic; I really don't know what the fuss is about.