An Anonymous Coward writes:
Economics affects us all, so why do so many remain ignorant of the fundamentals? Murray Rothbard said: "[I]t is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance."
Personally I'm tired of having to defend economics against both the mainstream advocates (with their broken models) and their critics (who tar economics with one brush). I take the time to educate myself and speak out, based on reason, not angry ignorance, and not on smugness, numerology, and appeals to the authority Lord Keynes.
There is a deep-seated tendency for people to misapply physical science techniques to the social sciences. This has resulted in mainstream economics degenerating into a modern day numerology. However there are intellectually sound schools of economics that do not attempt to treat human actions like Newtonian atoms.
This article from The Mises Institute discusses how and why mainstream economics has lost its way.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 19 2016, @06:19AM
The textbook used by about 95% of AP teachers (seriously -- mostly due to chapter size and lack of non-required material) is far-left liberal, by Paul Robin Krugman. Krugman writes for the New York Times -- that should tell you enough.
In college I got "Economics: Private and Public Choice" by Gwartney, Stroup, Sobel, and Macpherson. (very good book BTW) You wouldn't know it was the same subject!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 19 2016, @09:34AM
The textbook used by about 95% of AP teachers
What is this "AP" of which you speak? And what has it to do with the Mises?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 19 2016, @03:42PM
> Krugman writes for the New York Times -- that should tell you enough.
The NYT is culturally liberal and economically conservative.
So unless you think this textbook is promoting the gay agenda, you are off base and in the weeds.