Adam Smith and Karl Marx’s basic and monumental (in consequences) error
What could these two thinkers, considered to be opposites, have in common?
What could these two thinkers, considered to be opposites, have in common?
What, then, can be done with economic theory whose models resemble jokes about how many elephants can be fit into a refrigerator? And how, given the overrepresentation of often indecipherable mathematical symbolism, is one to distinguish good economics from bad?
August 2 saw Matthew Beller’s Daily Article “The Coming Second Life Business Cycle,” wh
In his new NBER working paper Martin Feldstein writes that “Reducing the large current account deficit will require both a higher rate of nat
The result of the governments' and the unions' meddling with the height of wage rates cannot be anything else than an incessant increase in the number of unemployed.
Economics is therefore not quantitative prediction. Nor is it a game or puzzle solving. Neither of the Friedman's assumptions — the rationality of economic agents and of the simplicity of preferences — is necessary.
This is a story about Linda Combs, who cleaned up the government’s
Mises knew why abandoning the principle of sound money would be so problematic: "In the opinion of the public, more inflation and more credit expansion are the only remedy against the evils which inflation and credit expansion have brought about."