I wish that I could give you a satisfactory answer.
Doug Henwood wrote:
> I don't mean you personally. Why is it that several hundred
> progressive economists and quasi-economists have so little to say
> about The Economy? It's a serious problem, no?
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
Ca
"Devine, James" wrote:
>
>
> My point was simply that a lack of discussion of some issue does not
> necessarily mean that if you put 9 economists and quasi-economists in a
> room, you get 10 opinions.
>
I think Jim is correct here, and my earlier statement to the contrary
was too flippant. H
I wrote: >>But another reason why pen-l doesn't talk about the economy is
that
we agree about a lot and so there's no point.<<
Ian: >Agree on the analyses of what's wrong with it or how to change it to
improve the prospects for humanity--and other living beings?<
on what's wrong with it. A lot
I don't see it as a serious problem. Speculation about the effect of a
central bank's interest rate policies and the likely timing of the next
Minsky crisis and the tendency of the rate of profit to fall, and most other
such questions, all gets boring pretty quickly. It's hard to have an ongoing
c
- Original Message -
From: "Devine, James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> But another reason why pen-l doesn't talk about the economy is that
we agree
> about a lot and so there's no point.
>
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
>
==
Agree on the analyses
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Henwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I don't mean you personally. Why is it that several hundred
> progressive economists and quasi-economists have so little to say
> about The Economy? It's a serious problem, no?
>
> Doug
>
- Original Message -
From:
Michael Perelman wrote:
>I have neither the authority nor the charisma to enforce my preferences.
>Also, I think that people must enjoy getting involved in catfights.
I don't mean you personally. Why is it that several hundred
progressive economists and quasi-economists have so little to say
a
