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
GMU econ profs take their work seriously
-
As far as GMU people go, Don is one of the better ones. He has a number of pretty good Law and Econ articles. If all the Austrians go in that direction, they might not be seen as fringe.
go back to reddit. don is a complete moron. have you ever seen his dumb posts on the minimum wage? he's a worse russ roberts.
-
Economist 7e26:
I've a sincere request that you help me out here by alerting me to the part(s) of my posts on minimum wage that are (as you describe them) "dumb." Is it my pointing out that raising the cost of taking some action reduces the attractiveness of taking that action - and that this truth holds even if the action is employing low-skilled workers? Or maybe it's my pointing to - and insisting on the relevance of - recent academic empirical researches by economists such as David Neumark, William Wascher, Jeremy West, Jeffrey Clemens, and Richard Burkhauser that find that raising minimum wages does indeed seem to reduce low-skilled workers' employment options? Perhaps instead (or in addition) it's my acknowledgment of the well-known economists argument higher minimum wages tend to favor less-risky workers (such as white teens from leafy suburbs who own their own cars) over more-risky workers (such as single moms from the inner city without their own cars). Or maybe it's my argument that some workers who remain employed at the minimum wage are likely to find that their jobs are made more difficult as employers adjust to the higher costs of employing those workers?
I understand that I'm "a complete moron," so you must be patient with my imbecility. If not for my benefit - I'm a lost cause - specify in detail my dumbness for the sake of readers who seek enlightenment. - Don Boudreaux
-
Post an extended reply on Cafe Hayek or we can't be sure this is you Don.
Economist 7e26:
I've a sincere request that you help me out here by alerting me to the part(s) of my posts on minimum wage that are (as you describe them) "dumb." Is it my pointing out that raising the cost of taking some action reduces the attractiveness of taking that action - and that this truth holds even if the action is employing low-skilled workers? Or maybe it's my pointing to - and insisting on the relevance of - recent academic empirical researches by economists such as David Neumark, William Wascher, Jeremy West, Jeffrey Clemens, and Richard Burkhauser that find that raising minimum wages does indeed seem to reduce low-skilled workers' employment options? Perhaps instead (or in addition) it's my acknowledgment of the well-known economists argument higher minimum wages tend to favor less-risky workers (such as white teens from leafy suburbs who own their own cars) over more-risky workers (such as single moms from the inner city without their own cars). Or maybe it's my argument that some workers who remain employed at the minimum wage are likely to find that their jobs are made more difficult as employers adjust to the higher costs of employing those workers?
I understand that I'm "a complete moron," so you must be patient with my imbecility. If not for my benefit - I'm a lost cause - specify in detail my dumbness for the sake of readers who seek enlightenment. - Don Boudreaux -
Two letters to presidential candidates = 1 RAE = 1 top field at GMU, top 40 Econ program
I can see that in departmental annual evaluation I can write: "Achievements - Wrote two letters to presidential candidates and received their responses thanking me for my efforts; wrote back to both of them."