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
contradicts Cowen's thesis that big ideas are the essence of growth. I'm on McCloskey's side.
The good stuff presumably coming after the first 20 minutes of excruciating triviality? I couldn't take any more at that point and gave up on it.
"even with the occasional stammer"? I've seen a few videos of her speaking and this seems to just be how she talks. Nice.
Mr. Sullivan,
A 100-fold increase in the average standard of living is trivial to you? I'd love to know what you think is a non-trivial topic!
I believe McCloskey has clearly outlined the main issues regarding the economic growth throughout the past centuries of human history. Furthermore I believe that she is correct in saying that "we have science because we are rich". Indeed it is true that our wealth has not been generated by science, but the contrary: science has been generated because of wealth. I also agree with Mr Falkenstein, and thus with McCloskey, on the fact that economic growth was favored by small technological improvements and by creative destruction on a smaller scale, rather than on a greater scale.