Economics Questions

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

John James — Fri, 06 May 2011 22:32:11 GMT

Prateek Sanjay:

To reiterate Daniel James Sanchez' point:

Paul Krugman reads Brad DeLong's blog.

Brad DeLong reads Daniel Kuehn's blog.

Daniel Kuehn reads JMF Catalan's blog.

JMF Catalan reads Bob Murphy's blog.

Guess why Paul Krugman became aware of Bob Murphy's article in Mises? ;)

Oh yes. I'm sure Catalan heard from Murphy and told Kuehn, who told DeLong, who told Krugman. I'm sure it had absolutely NOTHING to do with the hundreds, perhaps thousands of emails Krugman was sent and comments posted on his crummy columns and blogs literally on a constant basis.

Without that chainlink of blogger economists reading each other's stuff, there's absolutely no way Krugman would have heard about $65k sitting around just waiting to be handed over to a food bank in NYC just as soon as he agrees to simple debate against some mortal economist in Nashville who has a self-admitted "unhealthy obsession" with Krugman and publishes articles and blog entries about him on a constant basis.

It's not as if Krugman reads his email or comments...or...Google's himself.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

skylien — Wed, 04 May 2011 08:24:33 GMT

How do they say where I live; Through talking people get together! (although sounds a bit more trivial in english and without dialect..)

But instead of only reading everyones blog maybe they should sometimes go for a beer all together (and make a video for us peepers ;)

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Prateek Sanjay — Wed, 04 May 2011 07:57:02 GMT

To reiterate Daniel James Sanchez' point:

Paul Krugman reads Brad DeLong's blog.

Brad DeLong reads Daniel Kuehn's blog.

Daniel Kuehn reads JMF Catalan's blog.

JMF Catalan reads Bob Murphy's blog.

Guess why Paul Krugman became aware of Bob Murphy's article in Mises? ;)

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Daniel James Sanchez — Wed, 04 May 2011 07:11:48 GMT

Student,

Kuehn has very quickly become quite a popular blogger (deservedly so), and PhD economists respond to his posts and comments on a regular basis. He is taking part in an exciting (and hopefully fruitful) conversation in the economics blogosphere among economists of various schools of thought. I can only imagine googling his own name from time to time helps him stay on top of the numerous conversations he is part of. It's a smart thing to do. It helps promote the discussion. And it's a smart thing to do for his career.

And regarding "only responding to posts about him", if we had fewer snide and non-constructive posts like yours, maybe Kuehn would participate more here.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Student — Wed, 04 May 2011 06:33:04 GMT

haha. Sorry William. just messing around. Will keep it to PM in the future.

PS* Daniel, just busting your balls, mate. No real harm intended.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

William — Wed, 04 May 2011 06:16:11 GMT

Let's try to keep the personal stuff off the General Forum and done via pm or Member Issues please.

About MEMBER ISSUES:

This forum is for issues with other members. Subscribe and unsubscribe as necessary to deal with issues. Subscribe permanently, if you like to tune into member drama. Feel free to stay unsubscribed if you want to tune it out:

http://mises.org/Community/groups/memberissues/default.aspx

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Daniel Kuehn — Wed, 04 May 2011 06:12:51 GMT

Student - do you make a habit of pseudonymously condescending to people you don't even know?

I like discussing ideas with people - if other people discuss ideas I've posted (it happens fairly regularly) I like to engage them, so I google it. You're going to have to learn to live with that somehow.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

MrSchnapps — Wed, 04 May 2011 06:04:34 GMT

Oh come on, Student, give it a rest. This isn't RevLeft.

I, for one, welcome discussion from others who don't necessarily share our economic views.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Student — Wed, 04 May 2011 05:58:51 GMT

Well I don't "google this forum". I do google my name to see if anyone has mentioned any of my blog posts. It's a good way to keep up with reposting. Is that funny or weird to you? Why?

Is it weird that you google your name (apparently on a routine basis)??? And participate in a forum only to respond to posts about you??? No that isn't weird. In fact, they have a name for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Jonathan M. F. Catalán — Wed, 04 May 2011 05:31:56 GMT

Student,

But the honest truth is that Hayek also believed that government intervention during a recession could be justified. See my link above.

As a second best alternative.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Phaedros — Wed, 04 May 2011 04:55:26 GMT

So it doesn't worry you that when asked why they picked the number "700 billion" they answered that they just wanted a really big number?

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

pentahedron — Wed, 04 May 2011 04:51:05 GMT

"videos like this perpetuate the vulgar austrian view that any and all monetary interventions will automatically lead to distortions in the capital structure. that is not what hayek thought at all. "

I agree and it's probably the reason why you have people constantly misinterpreting Austrian positions and writing them off as a fringe group of market fundamentalist.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Daniel Kuehn — Wed, 04 May 2011 04:49:57 GMT

re: "haha Kuehn, do you google this forum every few weeks or so to see if anyone has mentioned your name? all of your previous posts seem aimed at image management."

Well I don't "google this forum". I do google my name to see if anyone has mentioned any of my blog posts. It's a good way to keep up with reposting. Is that funny or weird to you? Why?

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Student — Wed, 04 May 2011 04:42:19 GMT

haha Kuehn, do you google this forum every few weeks or so to see if anyone has mentioned your name? all of your previous posts seem aimed at image management.

Re: Papola's Second Masterpiece

Daniel Kuehn — Tue, 03 May 2011 22:37:23 GMT

re: "Kuehn also seems to be very, very wrong. Is that right? lol He seems to argue a lot that we need more aggregate demand. That's very indicative of the top-down approach he says he does not entertain. It seems to me the fight is individualism vs. aggregate this or that. I don't see how Kuehn can really believe the things he said, his criticism is very shallow and non-substantive."

If by "top down" you mean "answering in a way that references any concept expressed at an aggregated level" then I suppose I have no choice but to plead guilty. But that seems like an odd definition of "top down".