IM NOW LEAVING THIS POST
I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY REPLIES RELATED TO MY QUESTION
TOO MUCH INTOLERANCE.
I WONDER WHAT MERIT EXISTS IN DEBATING WITH YOURSELF IN A MIRROR.
Pot meet kettle?
P.S.
I never thought I would be harder to talk about economics in a place were individuals are supposed to be correctly educated in the subject.
INSTEAD
-there are many philosophers around
-there are many intolerants
-there are some uneducated in the arts of ethics and courthesy
CONCLUSION
After more than 80 replies I only found one guy correctely educated in the arts of economics.
THANK YOU and have a great day.
So?
Pot meet kettle.
Laughable at best.
You mean you found one guy who you agreed with and ignored the rest?
Peace out broski.
You seem to have some form of borderline personality disorder.
I can’t tell if your posts are genuine or if your just trying to enrage other posters. However, given your initial question, if it is hard for us to talk about economics as it is for you, I would conclude that there is a theme generating behind your posts. You seem to be very upset at an almost rebellious adolescent level about something. I would suggest you try and clear your head and maybe open your mind to the thoughts of others, isn’t that how you got here in first place?
You never even tried to talk economics.
You will find it common that people become intolerant when every one of the questions they ask are evaded and their beliefs are determined unimportant.
Do you expect all of the AnCaps on this forum to embrace you when you say things like “I don’t care about anything an anarcho-capitalist says”?
Don’t despair, Wolfman. There are reasonable people you can talk to–but this isn’t the place to find them (or rather, it is a place that attracts many unreasonable people who are only here to be rude and call people names).
As someone who teaches the subject, I commend your desire to learn more about economics. And you don’t have to have a Ph.D. to do so, or to be qualified to ask questions.
The thing to do is to read a lot. And forget about schools of thought. Picking a school means narrowing your vision, which can only cost you. There are great economists of many schools, and of no schools at all. Those who obsess most about belonging to this or that school tend to be third rate–and that goes for all the more fervent self-styled Austrians (many of whom don’t know much about economics but are simply people who hate the government. Mind you, I hate it too–but that alone doesn’t qualify me as a good economist!)
Read, among other non-Austrians, the great Adam Smith, Knut Wicksell; Schumpeter (Austrian by training but really not classifiable); Jevons; McCloskey, Yeager, and Coase (the last all thankfully still around). As for blogs, try “Coordination Problem” and “Cafe Hayek” for (mostly) polite Austrians–though there are obnoxious . trolls everywhere–and Marginal revolution for more eclectic fare. As for this community–well, it has its good points, I suppose, but polite and open-minded discussion is not one of them. True believers don’t have time for such.
Can you get your economics right and still lean left? Well, if left means social freedom, why not? If it means, say, socialist planning, then I doubt it, unless you like the idea of people being kept poor. By the way, an Austrian book that belongs on every aspiring economists’ reading list is von Mises’ Socialism. Give it a try!
Best,
George Selgin
Wicksell is an Austrian.
Except the “Umpire” (the state) is also playing in the game… it gets to be the batter (make laws), as well as umpire at the same time (final arbiter, decision maker) - so if he says its a home run (while he is the batter), well by golly gosh - it’s a home run, if he calls it a strike, then it’s a strike. (Typical statist reply forthcoming: if you don’t like the game, leave), except that the other players were there first.
You haven’t even talked economics, you’ve been talking about political philosophy.
For crying out loud, since you struggle to make this most basic of distinctions (that I pointed out in the second response of this thread) how do you expect others to take you seriously? Especially when you seem more about statements, than questions or a legitimate yearning for learning. (Complete disregard for sources provided on topics you questioned, then irrationally - instantly dismissed).
You willfully ignore the vast majority of people here who have much to offer, chief among them - being reasonable, so you can condemn us all? I see reasonable people you can talk to - all over the place here.
Good Gracious: he was a Swede!
This last remark was concerning the claim that Wicksell was an Austrian. I don’t know why it posted down here.
As for my claim about rude people on this list: I did not say they were all rude; however, the person who claims I did is certainly not one of the exceptions.
It was a simple question, seeking further clarification… and it was about reasonableness.
The emphasis is mine. How else did you expect others to take it? Well I’m glad you haven’t written off this whole place and the many fine individuals within it. Right?
“the person who claims I did is certainly not one of the exceptions.”
Ah, thanks for the pot shot? Funnily though, I never made the claim you are now attributing to me.
Yes and Rothbard was an American. But here we are…
You should never wrestle with pigs…
Nor should you come to a gun fight, with a knife. (Purely voluntary of course) [;)]
I love lamp.
You do? [:D]
Dr. Selgin, please know that there are some very good discussions that go on here, and that some of us are actively trying to combat the incivility and intellectual intolerance that, I will admit, is still a problem.
Some of the most rude and intolerant members are now gone, and for a while, I think (and others do too), it was a lot better. But for some reason in the past few days, a spirit of dogmatism and vindictiveness has flared up among certain members against people who don’t toe the ancap line and are “trollish” enough to actually be vocal and opinionated about it.
Wolfman, please stick around. There really is a lot to learn here, and, yes, regulars patient and knowledgeable enough to point you in interesting directions, in a gentlemanly way. Such people include Adam Knott, nirgrahamUK, AJ, Laughing Man, Jonathan Catalan, DD5, JosephBright, and many others. Maybe next time address a thread specifically to one or two of them. And if you get insulted, please use the reporting forum.
And to the anarchists who have deemed it fit to attack Wolfman and even intimate that he should be banned: I am with you. I don’t even think a night watchmen state makes sense. So this has nothing to do with Austro-sectarianism. But you don’t convince people by attacking them. You don’t convince people with emotional outbursts that exhibit your righteous hatred for the state. Neither do you convince third parties.
As I’ve had to say elsewhere recently.
- There is a difference between intellectual principle and intellectual intolerance. If you think you aren’t bound to basic standards of civility because you’re on “home turf”, and the other side is evil, you’re wrong.
- There is a difference between an opinionated iconoclast and a troll. So if you are calling for a purge of opinionated non-anarchists, save your breath: it’s not going to happen.
And rationalizing that they are “intellectually dishonest” and thus “trolls” because you don’t think their argumentation is valid or that they are not “open to conversion” (is that ever a creepy standard) is to no avail.
“But for some reason in the past few days, a spirit of dogmatism and vindictiveness has flared up among certain members against people who don’t toe the ancap line and are “trollish” enough to actually be vocal and opinionated about it.”
And here I am thinking.. that it’s actually those who have no logical arguments and instead base their position on emotions and personal feelings that are actually the ones who are dogmatic.
“open to conversion” (is that ever a creepy standard)"
“Open to persuasion”
“Open to rational discourse”
“Open minded”
Do these phrases suit your temperament better?
Lilburne, I just want to say that you are the best moderator I have ever seen on any site I’ve ever posted on. If only all moderators could be as calm and patient and as knowledgeable about the subjects they’re commenting on and moderating but at the same time open to differing viewpoints as you are then I think the internet would be a better place. Furthermore, I have been banned from websites before and disagreed with the decision but I know that if you ever decided to ban me I would know I’d definitely done something truly wrong and probably earned it. Good job.
Jacob