George Stigler doesn’t think much of the influence over economists over public policy
11 May 2018 Leave a comment
CofC Adam Smith Week 2018 – Dr. Lynne Kiesling
09 May 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, comparative institutional analysis, economics of regulation, history of economic thought, industrial organisation
Classical Liberals vs. Conservatives vs. Socialists | Leonard P. Liggio
08 May 2018 Leave a comment
in Austrian economics, development economics, economic history, history of economic thought, law and economics, Public Choice, rentseeking
Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang said that members of his profession have a distinct lack of interest in reality
07 May 2018 Leave a comment
in history of economic thought Tags: cranks
#Marx200 #Marx2018
06 May 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, Austrian economics, comparative institutional analysis, development economics, F.A. Hayek, history of economic thought, Marxist economics
Was Karl Marx right? | The Economist
05 May 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, business cycles, development economics, economic history, economics of bureaucracy, entrepreneurship, history of economic thought, industrial organisation, labour economics, macroeconomics, Marxist economics, poverty and inequality, Public Choice, public economics Tags: economics of socialism
From Paul Samuelson’s essay on marxist economics
About right
04 Mar 2018 Leave a comment
in history of economic thought, liberalism, Marxist economics Tags: Leftover Left, political correctness
HT Peter Creswell
Didn’t Marx think the paradox of value worked in his favour?
21 Feb 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, Austrian economics, history of economic thought, Marxist economics Tags: The Great Enrichment
The Myth of Scandinavian Socialism
17 Feb 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, history of economic thought, industrial organisation, Marxist economics Tags: Sweden
Why did Milton Friedman bother? James Buchanan was supposedly far more influential despite rarely looking up from his desk
13 Feb 2018 2 Comments
in constitutional political economy, history of economic thought, Public Choice
Milton Friedman invested decades of his time in being a public intellectual. Writing Capitalism and Freedom in 1962, newspaper columns from the 1960s, countless television interviews and public speeches, travelled the world, and of course his famous 1970s TV series Free to Choose. Friedman wrote a bestselling autobiography Two Lucky People and many other books for popular audiences.
If Democracy in Chains is to be believed, James Buchanan was far more influential in a dastardly Machiavelli way despite no work as a public intellectual, hardly any online video clips, a difficult writing style, and a dry way of public speaking. His only known public policy position would be his advocacy of ruinous inheritance taxes.
Other than that, Buchanan devoted himself to the technical aspects of public choice economics. As a teacher, I am told that he crammed all his lectures into 2-weeks to get back to his desk as quickly as possible without further interruption from students.
If only Milton had known. You can be immensely influential despite making no effort to publicise your views or participate in public debate or even be all that articulate. As Nancy MacLean herself noticed
There are a few reasons Buchanan has been overlooked. One is that the Koch cause does not advertise his work, preferring to tout the sunnier primers of Hayek, Friedman and even Ayn Rand when recruiting. Buchanan is the advanced course, as it were, for the already committed. Another is that Buchanan did not seek the limelight like Friedman, so few on the left have even heard of him. I myself learned of him only by serendipity, in a footnote about the Virginia schools fight.
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments