PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:2611] Re: Re: Immutability of Subjects
Brad De Long wrote:
>Economics is hard enough to do without thinking about the mutability of the
>subject too.
So let's just assume away all those complications, eh? Then you can do all
your really neat math that ends up proving nothing other than the
economist's own cleverness and membership in the priesthood. Meanwhile, the
policy-oriented economists can do everything to make sure that subjects
conform ever more closely to their assumptions - deregulate everything,
undermine all nonmonetary social bonds, etc. etc. - so that we are forced
to become the Homo economicus of their dreams. Ick.
Doug
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:2616] Terribly Sorry,
Rosser Jr, John Barkley Tue 26 Jan 1999, 18:40 GMT
- [PEN-L:2615] Re: Re: Re: Immutability of Subjects <13994.31482.896841.532524@lisa.zopyra.com> <3.0.3.32.19990126083228.006af428@lmumail.lmu.edu>,
Peter Dorman Tue 26 Jan 1999, 17:28 GMT
- [PEN-L:2614] Re: Re: Re: Re: 1998 Bad Writing Contest,
PJM0930 Tue 26 Jan 1999, 17:22 GMT
- [PEN-L:2613] Re: Re: Immutability of Subjects,
PJM0930 Tue 26 Jan 1999, 17:21 GMT
- [PEN-L:2611] Re: Re: Immutability of Subjects,
Doug Henwood Tue 26 Jan 1999, 16:57 GMT
- [PEN-L:2612] Re: Re: Immutability of Subjects,
Jim Devine Tue 26 Jan 1999, 16:32 GMT
- [PEN-L:2610] Re: Trade deficit and Doug Henwood,
William S. Lear Tue 26 Jan 1999, 15:54 GMT
- [PEN-L:2609] Trade deficit and Doug Henwood,
Michael Perelman Tue 26 Jan 1999, 15:41 GMT
- [PEN-L:2608] Re: Immutability of Subjects,
Brad De Long Tue 26 Jan 1999, 15:33 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]