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
It does not take much to predict that Washington will not be able to reign in their spending. Interest rates must rise resulting in a real mess and a bad economy for generations. On the other hand, if Washington performs a miracle and controls spending, the austere outcome will create a recession/depression that will last for at least the next 10 years. The second option is much better but neither is anything to look forward to.
Nifty idea. Would you be open to reporting what your own answers were?
When I read the headline, what I actually saw was:
"Cats Herded"
I do, however, agree that economists typically understand the role of government spending and private labor unions better than the average citizen...even if that statement is a tad bit elitist.