"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking" - JMK
- Jeff Sachs calls Krugman a Crude Keynesian (HT - Ryan Murphy). I'm not quite sure about this. It wasn't that long ago at all that Krugman was talking a lot about unsustainable debt and I see no reason to think he's given up those concerns. What he says regularly is that the biggest drag on the debt is the continuing depression. Sachs may not agree with that logic and the priorities that it implies, but it's not immediately clear to me why that disagreement makes Krugman care less about the long-term debt than Sachs. My own debt concern revolves more around entitlements and tax reform than anything having to do with Keynesian policies. If either of those came up as an even remotely realistic possibility I'd be fully on board, but that seems unlikely.
- I've been busy this last week, so I haven't kept up with the blogosphere (and will be very busy for the next week), but I did want to bring attention to this post by stickman. His point is that scientists - climatologists and economists - are, contrary to the claims of some, not generally the ideologues in the climate science debate. Both are quite up front about what they can and cannot prove and admitting that outcomes are going to be various. One of the emphases of the video he shares is that climatology is a systems science (economics is too) and thus precise prediction is hard.
- Jonathan Catalan also responds to my post on externalities and free market economics.
- A post from a couple months ago by Andrew Bossie on the relationship between the G.I. Bill and the post-war non-depression. This is one of those things I really wish I had time to dig into more now, but I just have too much on my plate.
On to econometrics homework!
4 hours ago