tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post4818189718848898292..comments2024-03-27T03:00:27.024-04:00Comments on Facts & other stubborn things: A few more things on the Krugman postEvanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12259004160963531720noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-4901815624253467322013-07-17T16:05:32.606-04:002013-07-17T16:05:32.606-04:00If a Randian wants to kick up a fuss I'd under...If a Randian wants to kick up a fuss I'd understand that, but I don't think I've heard from any Randians on it yet.<br /><br />I like to think I differentiate between sloppy treatments of Keynesianism that just preface an exposition of, say, Austrian economics and sloppy treatments of Keynesianism that are <i>the main point of a post</i>.<br /><br />Throw away lines are just that. Do I have a history of making a big deal of throw away lines? Pretty sure I don't.Daniel Kuehnhttp://www.factsandotherstubbornthings.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1740670447258719504.post-32418664518656342592013-07-17T15:58:12.724-04:002013-07-17T15:58:12.724-04:00"That seems to me to miss the major point of ..."That seems to me to miss the major point of the post, which was not to be a treatise on Randianism but instead to highlight the importance of taking Coase and Williamson seriously"<br /><br />But if someone dares to use "Keynesianism" inb sloppy way ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com