Potpourri
==> Shawn Ritenour writes a lengthy summary and critique of Market Monetarism.
==> This guy sent me his critique of Gene Callahan and my conversation on Say’s Law. Eh, I’m going to be honest: I was a little annoyed at him using my first name in such a flippant manner, but what really pushed me over the edge was when he asked if I’d ever read Say’s Law. Yeah, I’m pretty sure I even photocopied the whole section of Say’s Law of Markets when I taught it in my History of Economic Thought course. I could be a saint, realizing that Smiling Dave’s gentle sarcasm is just his schtick and that I should spend a half hour trying to help him see the light…but I’d rather do another interview with Team Brittany instead. Not gonna lie to you.
==> Ben Powell sent me his Freeman article on anarchy. I like 95% of it very much, but unfortunately the title and opening hook I think are a huge non sequitur. Ben says, “Do you think the Cambodian people, faced with [the Khmer Rouge], would have been better off with no government at all? Congratulations. You are, sometimes, an anarchist.” OK Ben, would you rather eat your left arm or a hunk of spinach? Congratulations, you’re a vegetarian, sometimes. This is the first, and probably last, time in history that I will criticize an article on anarchy that the NYT favorably links.
==> Everyone’s flipping out about this McDonald’s story, but I for one am glad they’re raising their standards. I can’t stand it when I place my order and the kid stares at me.
==> Poors Lars Christensen thinks he’s blown open a hole in Austrian business cycle theory, by saying we should claim that price inflation goes up during recessions (if we look just at the supply side). If only I had written up an article on that…
Murphy Tackles the White House 2014 Budget Proposal
I like to beat up on Paul Ryan etc. for being faux-tough on the fiscal problem, but man oh man, in this IER post I go through the Obama Administration’s 2014 Budget Proposal. They don’t even pretend to improve things.
I ended up writing this post pretty late at night, and was feeling saucy. I actually said, “George Orwell would be proud to read that $600 billion in new revenue was raised through the ‘American Taxpayer Relief Act.’ We would hate to see the amount of revenue extracted from an ‘American Taxpayer Grief Act.'”
Thanks, I’ll be here all week folks. Remember to tip your waitresses.
Who Said It?
“When the stock market crash arrived in October, 1929, Herbert Hoover, now the president, intervened so rapidly and so massively that the market–adjustment process was paralyzed, and the Hoover–Roosevelt New Deal policies managed to bring about a permanent and massive depression, from which we were only rescued by the advent of World War II.”
HINT: It’s not David Stockman. And I have actually read this quote several times, but never saw how odd it was until someone just emailed me, asking about it.
It’s On Like Donkey Kong: John Carney Will Host Murphy/Mosler Debate
Just confirmed it with John… He is hosting the debate on MMT/Austrian economics. John was the perfect choice because of articles like this at CNBC.
More details soon…
Team Brittany Interviews Murphy
The schtick with these ladies is that they are all named Brittany (really), hence the name “Team Brittany.” We talk about Bitcoin, the world economy, voting, my man-crush on Barney Frank, and tips for karaoke. Lots of giggling ensued (from them, not me).
Moderator Bask
Hey kids,
In the comments please list some suggestions for who should moderate the MMT/Austrian debate between Warren Mosler and me. It’s going to be hosted online; i.e. we don’t have to be in the same physical place.
Potpourri
==> Lessons for the Young Economist is now poised to infiltrate China.
==> I am quoted in this article about Bitcoin, saying something noncommittal.
==> Tom Woods announces the Ron Paul Homeschool Curriculum.
==> I talk to Scott Horton about the Fed and U.S. wars.
==> A funny rant about the “I f**king love science!” page. Bad words, obviously. (HT2 Daniel Kuehn)
==> The two cranky guys from the Muppets, now on YouTube and talking about economic issues.
==> I get Zwolinski’s general point, but if you have to say, “After all, who doesn’t think it’s wrong to steal someone else’s property, to club some innocent person over the head, or to force others to labor for one’s own private benefit?” you know you’re in dangerous waters. (I.e. Zwolinski is going to show us all the times it *is* OK to steal someone else’s property, club an innocent person over the head, and force others to labor for one’s own private benefit.)
==> Russ Roberts has some great points in his debate on the minimum wage.
==> Is there a definitive account of what happened with Wesley Snipes? Like, was he just rolling the dice, or was he not paying his taxes for ideological reasons? And, did he effectively trade a few years of his life for several million dollars, or did they get the money anyway?
==> Jacob Levy gives an interesting critique of Landsburg’s (I think unintentionally) provocative post. Here’s Levy:
“I experience discomfort at knowing that you are doing something I don’t approve of” is not basic building block of how humans express morality to each other. ”I disapprove of what you are doing because…” is the normal way to begin– and it doesn’t count as a successful end to the sentence to say “… because it causes me psychic discomfort to think about your doing that.” The attempt to build Rube Goldberg machines that approximate basic moral judgments using only the utilitarian building blocks of pleasure and pain is sometimes successful, but even when it is, it looks like (as Bernard Williams put it) thinking one thought too many. The reason for moral disapproval is primary; running it through the fact that other people experience psychic discomfort at the activity is, at best, taking the long way around, and, normally, a misunderstanding of what’s at stake. Human actors have, and offer, reasons for their moral reactions, and don’t treat the mere fact that they have the reactions as substitutes for those reasons.
Sort of akin to my Captain Obvious post about the Hoover/Mellon record, I suppose I must respond to David Friedman who seems genuinely baffled that Landsburg’s post upset people. OK: People really were saying after the conviction that “c’mon, that wasn’t ‘rape rape'” and of course CNN did all kinds of crazy coverage about the poor plight of the convicted rapists. So in that context, Landsburg writing a post containing the sentence, “As long as I’m safely unconsious and therefore shielded from the costs of an assault, why shouldn’t the rest of the world (or more specifically my attackers) be allowed to reap the benefits?” was not conducive to awards from Oprah.
Let’s be clear: Steve wasn’t suggesting we legalize rape, or that what happened to the girl in that case was no big deal. I’m not here implying that Steve should be fired. What I am saying is that Friedman’s reaction, saying people upset at Steve are either “stupid or evil,” is crazy too. It is obvious that that post would make people flip out, like I said when it first appeared.
==> Phew! A return to normalcy. Steve Landsburg talking about price discrimination. (“What?! He’s for discrimination?! He thinks the elderly should pay different prices!!”)
Guy Calls Cops on Fish Fry Buffet
At first I couldn’t believe the elementary error* in this Ozimek post which “proves” health insurance and all-you-can-eat buffets don’t exist, but that’s not important now. The important thing is to watch this short video.
* Gene Callahan spotted it too, but let me put it more succinctly: How can there be restaurants at all in a market? I mean, a customer is only going to purchase a meal if he gets more out of it than it costs. But that means the place goes out of business. QED. (Yes I realize Ozimek is trying to give the essence of the lemons problem, but his actual argument came out wrong.)
==> Humorous fact: I discovered a Chinese buffet near my office, and for a while I was going there like 4 times a week for lunch/dinner (meaning, I combined them into one gigantic meal that would have horrified Mark Sisson). I broke out of this destructive pattern when the place went out of business soon after I discovered it. Correlation yes, but causation? We can never know for sure in the social sciences.
Recent Comments