I am a 50 year old, ex-student of economics, finally coming back to getting more of a clue. My studies are haphazard and unguided and the only control I have on my accuracy is my own personal attention to writing well. This because I tend to write expository, persuasive essays on the subject of economics and policy, which I post to various non-economic forums (usually in their off topic sections).
While writing my latest essay I found myself trying to write a set of 'predictions' and discovered a severe lack of understanding on my part, the detail being unimportant here. I wound up posting to the Mises forum for the first time to ask a question. It then occurred to me that I could really use the feedback of people who know more than I do on these essays I am banging out, as a way of checking for accuracy and revealing weaknesses in my argument. This 'before' I post those essays to other forums. The ideal place of course to gain such feedback being here on Mises.org.
I am a bit concerned that my degree of knowledge of economics may reveal me to be more of an idiot than I am comfortable with. However I would rather have my ignorance revealed to me in a forum where people are largely already converted to the principles of freedom, rather than have me revealed as an idiot in a forum where most posters are big brother enthusiasts. That would run rather contrary to my intent of persuading people.
Please read any essay I post with the intention of revealing to me any errors of facts or theory. I really appreciate any feedback, expecially constructive criticism. It is hard for me to know if I am making an error, unless one of you tells me.