Advocates of Reason

Man has only one tool to fight error: reason.

Ludwig von Mises

1. An awesome post by Gene Callahan: the market ultimately decides who pays for a tax, not the government.

2. Another one by Gene: a contribution to the Hayek–Sraffa debate on the rate of interest.

3. As I’ve read more of his writing, I’ve realized that Bill Woolsey has a gift for thinking about complex topics and explaining them clearly to his readers. Here are two of his recent posts on the minimum wage: one on its relationship with monopsony and another more general one.

4. Peter Klein summarizes a debate of his with Scott Shane.

5. Don Boudraeux on import-led growth.

6. Not a link, but notice the new banner. At some point, I’ll probably have the old one alternate with this one.

4 thoughts on “Advocates of Reason

  1. Roberto Severino

    Gene Callahan is a godsend for sure. The economics landscape would be so much better if people stopped thinking about themselves as being part of various “schools” and treated the subject matter the way that Callahan does. I’ve been hesitant to comment on his blog lately. I tried to submit a comment on the post about praxeology and I still don’t see it. Maybe I angered him somehow when I didn’t mean to.

    I love the new banner and believe that you should keep it like this for a while.

    1. JCatalan

      Thank you regarding the banner, and yea I’m going to keep it as the only one for a while. Maybe when I have a third and, maybe, fourth one I’ll start to alternate them (WordPress does it automatically).

      Gene might not have seen the comment in his admin panel. All comments are automatically put in a queue and he reviews them. He might have missed it, or the comment may have accidentally been filtered into the spam folder. Unless the comment isn’t constructive, I don’t think Gene rejects them. I’ve had a few that I haven’t seen go through, but every time I have reason to suspect that it just didn’t process correctly.

      1. Roberto Severino

        All of what you said is highly plausible and I checked the specific post, but I still don’t see it. Oh well.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *