Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a degree in Economics and I had to reply to the most idiotic post of the day. The Economist is one of the most respected economic publications in the world if not the most respected. Their articles are usually balanced, accurate and thought provoking. Obviously, you have never read the Economist in your life but if you are looking for something a bit more intellectual than FOX News and/or Rush Limbaugh, I would definitely recommend it.
My husband is a Professor of Business and we discuss Economics frequently. I am very aware of this publication, please don't patronize me sir.
This paper has endorsed historically candidates of all parties. Reagan was endorsed by the Economist, as was Clinton and John Kerry.
I think it is notable however, that this paper is a supporter of progressive taxation, which to me is a give-away that it leans left. When I hear 'progressive taxation' this is parlance for punishing achievement, or government interceding within the free market.
My husband is a Professor of Business and we discuss Economics frequently. I am very aware of this publication, please don't patronize me sir.
Yeah right, hubby is a prof.
Even if that were true, the egghead academians are the ones who have consistently been wrong concerning forecasts, and most of them are Keynesians with no real understanding of the economy (Bernanke is a classic example of a clueless egghead). It would do you well to not speak down to someone by saying they're an economics professor.
Even if that were true, the egghead academians are the ones who have consistently been wrong concerning forecasts, and most of them are Keynesians with no real understanding of the economy (Bernanke is a classic example of a clueless egghead). It would do you well to not speak down to someone by saying they're an economics professor.
It is true, and I was defending myself against someone who was talking down to me, read the whole thread hon. I stand by what I said many times in this forum, Obama is a socialist... deal with it, libs.
This paper has endorsed historically candidates of all parties. Reagan was endorsed by the Economist, as was Clinton and John Kerry.
I think it is notable however, that this paper is a supporter of progressive taxation, which to me is a give-away that it leans left. When I hear 'progressive taxation' this is parlance for punishing achievement, or government interceding within the free market.
Wow, you better tell all the Republicans that believe in and have believed in progressive taxation, for decades, that they are left leaning!
Even if that were true, the egghead academians are the ones who have consistently been wrong concerning forecasts, and most of them are Keynesians with no real understanding of the economy (Bernanke is a classic example of a clueless egghead). It would do you well to not speak down to someone by saying they're an economics professor.
You are absolutely right, although economists have divided Economics into Positive and Normative, I think that all Economics is essentially normative due to obvious reasons: humans are weak, human knowledge is partial and also bias is a big problem. Humans are naturally inclined to mold the facts to fit their preoccupations, prejudices, and desires. I have to admit that I am very disappointed with Bernanke, some of his statements about the economy are as obvious as ECON 101 level material. I wonder how he got the job
It is true, and I was defending myself against someone who was talking down to me, read the whole thread hon. I stand by what I said many times in this forum, Obama is a socialist... deal with it, libs.
Yes, I am sure it's true. Then again, insulting someone by calling them an econonmics professor makes your story more believable.
Don't call me hon, cupcake. I'm about 5,000x more conservative than you or the econ prof of your dreams you conjured up. I am not defending Obama as a viable candidate, nor that other liberal Juan McCain. I am merely speaking as to the conservative nature of the Economist and how pathetic it is for a clueless person who's never read it has to make up a story about their husband to try to convince CDers.
The Economist left leaning? It was Margaret Thatchers favourite read,
and she would make Bush look like a socialist.
Rupert Murdoch reads It himself and I wouldn't call Fox news liberal.
Bush does not need any comparisons to be the socialist that he and his family have always been, of the noblesse oblige type.
The Economist is, generally speaking, classical liberal - if you don't know what the term means, read the history 17th-18th century political philosophy of Scotland in particular, the UK in general, and some European countries like France and Switzerland.
It usually supports the status quo, especially Anglo-American power in the world (regardless of party) but sometimes drifts into a strong opinion on certain personalities or issues. For example, it hires some "leftist" Italian hack to write negative op-ed articles against Silvio Berlusconi, one-sided and off-the-wall.
Overall, it is always a newspaper and you realize it when they write an article about an issue that you know personally and you see how they distort it.
The next US government will be dominated by Congress, but if Obama manages to maintain tax rates the way he says and avoids tipping the country, despite Congress, into a multi-year recession he will be considered at the least harmless, like Clinton, and could even serve two terms.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
