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
No wonder I'm so out of the loop. My view about economists and economics is this:
http://www.perc.org/articles/article903.php
FRIEDMAN TO BRADLEY, 10.15.04
"If you use a tool that is designed well for one purpose for a purpose for which it is not suited, that does not detract from the goodness of the tool for its purpose. The same thing goes with economics..."
Sincerely yours,
Milton Friedman"
To me, models and theories are more or less useful.
As for politics, I follow Burke:
"No rational man ever did govern himself, by abstractions and universals."
"A revolution will be the very last resource of the thinking and the good."
"... all that wise men ever aim at is to keep things from coming to the worst. Those who expect perfect reformations, either deceive or are deceived miserably."
"Man acts from motives relative to his interests; and not on metaphysical speculations."
So, I suppose that I would need to find people who:
1) Govern by universals
2) Want a revolution
3) Expect perfection in govt
4) Act based on metaphysics
And then, from that group, select the best advocate of that point of view.
I'm not certain that I can do either of those things.
The Manhattan Institute. Or maybe the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Not Liberal enough? Don't worry. They will be quickly enough for your deadline. Their funding depends on it and all the nice things thought about them over the last few years are going to have to be rethought.
Which makes us rethink the role of think tanks and the power we give them over us just because they promise the government a quicker turn-around than stodgy academic institutions. Peer review just gets in the way, don't you agree? ;-)
After reading Tyler's book and following the Spitzer case, I 'd say 'confessed' is the wrong word in each case. 'Self-proclaimed' in the case of Tyler. 'Caught' in the case of Spitzer.