ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
>>I would like to say to Richard Layard or Robert Frank, "You can have all the status points you want, if you would just agree to shut up about public policy." But, given their tastes, such an offer is self-contradicting.
Amen, brother. Amen.
Robert Frank is pure eeevil.
[Comment deleted for supplying false email address. To request having this comment restored, email the webmaster@econlib.org --Econlib Editor]
Yup. That's right. All lefties' policy opinions are merely tools in their endless quest for self-importance.
Anyone else think this sounds suspiciously like one of those nasty Type M arguments Arnold purports to hate so much.
Pots, kettles, etc.
It's true that Arnold does go for a type M here (and does deserve criticism for the cheap dig), but I'd add in his defense that it's a tangent at the end of his post, and if you excised the last paragraph this post would not really lose anything. In a post whose subject was Richard Layard or Robert Frank (I don't know who either is) it would be less forgivable.
TGGP,
Maybe I'm wrong, but I guess the reference seemed more than tangential to me, given that Layard and Frank are two of the biggest proponents of the whole line of happiness research, which is precisely what the whole post is about.
On the other hand, I do think there's an interesting question about the potential value of type M arguments. If we're interested in overcoming bias, then reasonable assessments of others biases are likely to be very valuable. The problem is (as I suspect Arnold is here) that we tend to be biased in those assessments.
I stand corrected on the relevance of Layard and Frank.
Interesting posting! What ever happened to the simple, eternal, universal truths that have proven through time to bring happiness and spiritual success..
"Be Guided By Goodness • Fuel Your Life With Fun • Passion Is Empty Without Compassion • Profit From Your Mistakes • Beating Yourself Up Reinforces Errors You Want To Avoid • Drive Discipline With Desire • Make Decisions Not Judgments • Schedule Your Time Not Your Tasks • Be Driven By Desire NOT Duress • See Obstacles NOT Problems • Focus On How You Want To Feel • Touch Each Person You Meet With A Positive Spirit • Love Propels Happiness
The key to lasting happiness is learning how to make yourself happy, not in trying to find things that make you happy. The first is an internal skill set, learning to create our own happiness, the latter requires us to look outside of ourselves for happiness.
Michele Moore - author of
How To Live A Happy Life -
101 Ways To Be Happier
http://HappinessHabit.com
http://HappinessBlog.com