Find it here, lots of goodies as always. Here is a section called Sounds of Silence: "individuals who probably should have replied to the critique but didn’t." Other topics include whether casinos cause crime, the Earned Income Tax Credit, suburbanization, usury, and Paul Krugman, all edited by my colleague Daniel Klein.
Elsewhere on the web, here is a long podcast with Austan Goolsbee.
Dan Klien’s entire “critique” of Paul Krugman’s NYT writing amounts to “he isn’t a liberarian!” THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE THIS JOURNAL!!!!
*rolls eyes*
Tyler and Bryan Caplan must be the only folks at GMU that don’t foam at the mouth every time Krugman pases up an opportunity to bash government action. “A smart economist that thinks the government can actually do some good!?? He should know better!!!” *sigh*
Sounds of Silence is pretty cool, but I still have reservations about it. Given a particular endowment of time, is it really worth scholars to reply to every critique of their work? Do we really want to shame them for not doing so?
A student who seems NOT to be able to read and comprehend what appears in EJW wrote (above):
“Dan Klien’s entire ‘critique’ of Paul Krugman’s NYT writing amounts to ‘he isn’t a liberarian!’ THANK GOODNESS WE HAVE THIS JOURNAL!!!!”
What comes to mind is what Clint Eastwood said in the role of Dirty Harry when his superior informed him of his “opinion”: “Well Captain, opinions are like @#$%&%$s, everybody’s got one.”
thank you for this information
Comments on this entry are closed.