-
[quote]Let's talk about unfunded liabilities. The US has what, $75 trillion in unfunded liabilities ? And that was before healthcare. We're running trillion dollar deficits today, the first sign that the S.S. America has hit an iceberg. I don't want to go down with the ship.[/quote] As Paul Krugman has pointed out, that figure doesn't
-
The game doesn't even make sense from a Keynesian standpoint; it keeps saying that "demand-pull inflation" happens whenever AD shifts to the right, but that only occurs when AD hits the inelastic portion of the AS curve. It's the most obnoxious game I think I've ever played.
-
If I was to say, "It's better to lose your arm than to lose your head", Lord Keynes would rush in to declare, "You see! Rcder supports mutilation!"
-
The "anarchy" in Somalia is, to my knowledge, hardly comparable to the type envisioned by Rothbard of Friedman. It has no ruling government, although there is one technically in existence which is backed by the UN, and I believe that various tribes and tribal courts prevail as the de facto authority in the "country". Interestingly
-
Kim Il-sung of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea for his fanatical devotion to the concept of a command economy, his religious observance of Marxism-Leninism-Stalinism, and the enforced social, cultural, political, and economic autkary which continues to this day. To rote, nearly every facet of the North Korean economy remains nationalized
-
I thought that this game by the New Keynesian Mankiw (http://bcs.worthpublishers.com/mankiw5/cat_070/game.htm) was incredibly insightful in terms of how practitioners of aggregate macroeconomic analysis view the economy; unending prosperity is as simple as managing a few exogenous variables. On a side note, do you guys think there's any practical
-
[quote]your efforts will pay off in the long term.[/quote] In the long run, we're all dead.
-
[quote] I belive these people are at least semi-sincere when they do this (as this is how they were brought up / trained). To call them liars would be a bit harsh. To say they are "doing" anything though,that is questionable. If anything, I tend to categorize this as a group that largely "out skeptics" themsleves from being comprehensible
-
Social Darwinism, as Vive has hinted at above, is a nonsensical sociological viewpoint because it is willfully oblivious to the fact that organisms (in this case, humans) can maximize their biological fitness through cooperation and its corollary, societal organization. Moreover, "Darwinism" selects for different traits in different situations;
-
Neodoxy, Man, this has not been my week! I meant to say Frederic Bastiat, not Say; to my knowledge Say never served in a political position. Whatever meager reputation I've had on this forum is probably gone now.