Nonsense on Religion and Monetary Policy
Mark Gongloff of the Huffington Post responded to a surpassingly silly post of Christopher T. Mahoney’s, former vice chairman of Moody’s. Unfortunately, Gongloff’s post is almost as silly as Mahoney’s.
Mark Gongloff of the Huffington Post responded to a surpassingly silly post of Christopher T. Mahoney’s, former vice chairman of Moody’s. Unfortunately, Gongloff’s post is almost as silly as Mahoney’s.
In case you missed it, L. GORDON CROVITZ (WSJ, “TV’s Unnatural Monopolies”) makes excellent use of Austrian analysis of market process and monopoly to support his argument that “The rationale for government regulation is collapsing in the face of technological change” in what used to be called the television market.
Further to my previous post on scientism: Steven Pinker has entered the fray, with a full-throated defense of the “scientific method,” to be applied anywhere and everywhere.
You can now enjoy a three-part lecture series on the basic principles of money from an Austrian perspective. The series was sponsored by Congressman Ron Paul and presented exclusively to Congressional staffers. The lecturers were myself, Constitutional lawyer Edmund Vieira, and investor, author, and financial commentator Peter Schiff.
The world probably would have been much better off had macroeconomics never been devised. Although I have in mind Keynesian macroeconomics above all, I include other types of macro models as well. I even include, somewhat reluctantly, the whole quantity theory approach descended from David Hume to the Friedmanites, now known as monetarism.