Close

Complete Captcha

• 6 years - 71 posts - Latest - RSS
• Thread: 230 Goods vs 123 No Goods

1. Economist
   e746
   

   hahahaha no way
   don did it help to have your blog sycophants help wipe away your tears?

   So, basically, no answer.

   i'm not here to teach a 60-year old guy who should know better the economics of the last couple decades that he's watched whiz by, nor am i here to teach him the more basic fact that when you only believe things that agree with you, you're never going to actually learn anything.
   but that's ok, don can rest easy knowing his posts are read by top economic minds, like your uncle who just loves to send you emails.

   jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention? Because if that's the case, my friend, old Don there isn't the one that's clueless about the last 30-40 years of economic thinking.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 7 Volod 2 Vlad !

2. Economist
   88a7
   

   Don Boudreaux makes the effort to write open letters not just to presidential candidates, but even to individual blog commenters: http://cafehayek.com/2016/10/open-letter-to-commenter-bret-wallach.html

   This guy is crazy eye from Adam Sandler movies. Prole.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

3. Economist
   84f7
   

   lol. please explain how one goes about "creating a theory for all time, based on everything currently known" without also "creating a theory to fit the available data".

   Mmmmm, no. If you create a theory to fit the available data, how does that help you when you get new data that contradicts the original data? If, instead, you create a theory for all time, based on everything currently known, but extending it with new insights, you can use data to disprove your theory, or give you greater confidence that it is correct. That is how Austrians use data.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 1 Vlad !

4. Economist
   e746
   

   And yes, Don is read by prominent economists. Some google scholar searching:

   - Rewriting the constitution: An economic analysis of the constitutional amendment process - cited by Posner >5 times, among others

   - Government by contract - cited by Ostrom >10 times, among others

   - The Coasian and Knightian theories of the firm - cited repeatedly by David Teese

   and many of these works aren't even in economic outlets, but in law journals.

   Meanwhile, do post your actual name and a publication in any reputable economic journal. We assuredly don't need you to "educate" anyone on economics, but some indication that you aren't a f**kwit 19 year old undergrad who just finished intermediate economics would be a good gesture for the amount of time that actual economists have wasted on you so far.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 2 Vlad !

5. Economist
   84f7
   

   jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention?

   the mere fact that you think in these terms makes it clear you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about

   6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 6 Vlad !

6. PaulKrugman
   Rep: 56

   Don you should register under your name like me.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 2 Vlad !

7. Economist
   8026
   

   While I agree with Don about the minimum wage, I think he needs to learn not to get all offended just because someone on the internet thinks he is dumb. People calling others dumb is like, what?, 40% of the internet?
   So Don, let it go, dude.

   You gotta realize these old folks aren't desensitized to internet chatter like most of us are. Someone publicly calling them out on their arguments is a serious challenge and they're conditioned to respond accordingly. Too bad the initiator is a f**king pussty who's obviously an undergrad and don't have an argument to offer other than the fact that anti-minimum wage writings trigger his vaginal sensitivities.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 0 Vlad !

8. Economist
   3001
   

   Don you should register under your name like me.

   What's funny is I bet this is the real PK, when Robin isn't looking over his shoulder or has him tied up in the closet. she likes to tie him up when she writes those NYT columns or so I hear.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 4 Volod 0 Vlad !

9. Economist
   1335
   

   At least Boudreaux has the guts to come here and post under his name, unlike the round mound of rebound (boettke) who posts here anonymously defending gmu.

   6 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 0 Vlad !

10. Economist
    e746
    

    jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention?

    the mere fact that you think in these terms makes it clear you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about

    Please educate me.

    http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png

    Lrm scum, piss off.

    6 years ago # QUOTE 5 Volod 1 Vlad !

11. Economist
    84f7
    

    first answer my question, future lemon:

    explain how one goes about "creating a theory for all time, based on everything currently known" without also "creating a theory to fit the available data".

    jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention?

    the mere fact that you think in these terms makes it clear you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about

    Please educate me.
    http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png
    Lrm scum, piss off.

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 5 Vlad !

12. Economist
    3001
    

    jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention?

    the mere fact that you think in these terms makes it clear you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about

    Please educate me.
    http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png
    Lrm scum, piss off.

    If you're a broette we should have babies. Studies indicate that intelligence is on the X chromosome, and while hyper-intelligence is most likely recessive if both X's have the necessary alleles, I can assure you that mine don't.

    So our daughters and our sons will be smaht.

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

13. Economist
    ab0c
    

    I refuse to read any of the actual posts in this thread but a GMU prof who obviously meticulously follows a google alert for his own name appearing in a thread on EJMR to defend his honor is ufkcing lol

    6 years ago # QUOTE 3 Volod 1 Vlad !

14. Economist
    2627
    

    jesus f**king christ how clueless are you? Do you genuinely think the last 30 years of informational economics vindicates any of the fringe left/sociotard nonsense you feel so passionate about, instead of being entirely consistent with a large fraction of the Austrians' views about the role of *information* in *economic decision-making*? Are you genuinely so clueless as to believe the recent intellectual revisionism that classical economics = general equilibrium models = pro-free markets, and the methodological advances in modern economics that takes into consideration of imperfect information or game theory is somehow a novel and unconditional argument for more government intervention?

    the mere fact that you think in these terms makes it clear you have no idea what the f**k you're talking about

    Please educate me.
    http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png
    Lrm scum, piss off.

    I'd be more impressed with my.uchicago.edu
    This is because I am a tenured professor at the University of Chicago, where I teach and research Economics after having received my doctorate from a similarly ranked school long ago.
    Did I mention I have tenure at the University of Chicago?

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

15. Economist
    84f7
    

    lol. mods deleted e746's last post in which he conceded that he's full of s**t. did anyone get a screen grab?

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

16. Economist
    2627
    

    B

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 0 Vlad !

17. Economist
    63ba
    

    lol. mods deleted e746's last post in which he conceded that he's full of s**t. did anyone get a screen grab?

    Getting real tired of your s**t, LRM scrub. Piss off.

    6 years ago # QUOTE 1 Volod 0 Vlad !

18. Economist
    2627
    

    Be careful 84f7, I heard e746 is involved with Harvard Econ. Here is the proof http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

19. Economist
    84f7
    

    what? it's not my fault they deleted it.

    lol. mods deleted e746's last post in which he conceded that he's full of s**t. did anyone get a screen grab?

    Getting real tired of your s**t, LRM scrub. Piss off.

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

20. Economist
    2627
    

    lol. mods deleted e746's last post in which he conceded that he's full of s**t. did anyone get a screen grab?

    Getting real tired of your s**t, LRM scrub. Piss off.

    Be careful e746 , I heard 84f7 is involved with Harvard Econ. Here is the proof http://i.imgur.com/dJBGLlx.png

    6 years ago # QUOTE 0 Volod 1 Vlad !

Reply »