The Glade 4.0

Try not to let your head explode, Khross.

He has a conventionally-powered aircraft carrier?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Tyler Durden is cooler

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Rule number 1... you do not talk about Econ Club.

yeah, that just does not have the same ring to it.

_________________
Darksiege
Traveller, Calé, Whisperer
Lead me not into temptation; for I know a shortcut

Intuitive would indicate leaps of logic no?

_________________

Tyler Cowen isn't as under-appreciated as he is over-stated and over-read. Attempting to position Cowen as a "thought leader" is generally laughable, considering his pedigree: Harvard stopped producing credible economists in the early 70s.

Actually, I'll be little more forthright. When it comes to macroeconomic issues, Cowen is about as credible was Paul Krugman, which is to say: not at all. He's politically invested in policy models that don't work. And that's rather ironic, because a lot of his serious research is micro-oriented; and a lot of it is very valid on the specific topics he's addressing. However, his expertise doesn't translate well to the aggregations and a-holistic policy models our governments use for a lot of reason. In fact, it's kind of fun to read academic papers where the broad implications of his research countermand the ideas he puts forth on his blog regarding government policy.

I think the problem here, that is here as in the Glade, is that most of you simply don't read enough economic papers or research to understand my criticisms. There are things Paul Krugman has written with which I agree, but they're few and far between. His work on economies of scale isn't exactly his own, and I do disagree with his Nobel Prize for work in the 70s done primarily by Robert Solow and a few others. But, even then Krugman's microeconomic foundations are weaker than Cowen's. By the by, the specific work that earned Krugman a Nobel Prize is too "mathy" to be verified in most cases.

Honestly, most economic studies have jumped. Which reminds me ...

How are you coming along on those books/papers?

_________________