Can he even conceive of an economist that deeply respects the thinking and legacy of Keynes, Hayek, Buchanan, and Friedman or does he just dismiss that as a nonsense position?
In the realm of the history of economic thought - which I've been moving out of lately for career-building reasons but would love to do more with at some point - the thing I probably hate most of all is turning the history of thought into a cartoonish battle of the titans. That's really not how intellectual history works, IMO.
Procrastinating on December 7, 2016
5 minutes ago