Re: [RC] Blonde, smart, "equipped," a good package if you ask me...

[David R. Block]

Title: "Remember, to a liberal, anyone who makes money in an endeavor frowned upon by liberals is 'greedy' and any person who express

I'm sure that he could do an excellent job of espousing Keynes. At most anything else, his worship of The Won gets in his way. If I can avoid him, I do. I don't want my eyeballs stuck in a perpetual eye roll. You have set your sights quite high, otherwise. ;-) David "Remember, to a liberal, anyone who makes money in an endeavor frowned upon by liberals is 'greedy' and any person who expresses an idea contrary to basic liberal dogma is preaching 'hate.'  How shallow these people are."—Neal Boortz   On 11/25/2011 11:48 PM, bil...@aol.com wrote: David : Never said that one principle was a good summary of the wit and wisdom of Paul Krugman. Just was saying that on this point he can't be argued with.   This is my approach with a lot of people, certain arguments they make are worthwhile, but I don't need to buy their whole program.   Its the Monica Crowley principle, I don't go around being all upset because she was Nixon's biographer. Instead I like her good points and leave it at that. Besides, if she ever wants to hop in the sack with me I will gladly overlook her Nixon stuff.   Just dreaming...   As for Krugman, his politics, as you know, mostly turn my stomach.   As an economist, however, he does say some useful things when motivated to do so. If I ever need someone to explain the fine details of Keynes he would be a good choice to seek answers from on the subject. Like that.   Billy   ----------------------------------------------------------------       11/25/2011 9:01:42 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, david.r.bl...@verizon.net writes: Sorry, but I do not find that an apt description of former ENRON adviser Krugman. He finds the Left Progressive solution and cherry picks the data to support it. David "Remember, to a liberal, anyone who makes money in an endeavor frowned upon by liberals is 'greedy' and any person who expresses an idea contrary to basic liberal dogma is preaching 'hate.'  How shallow these people are."—Neal Boortz   On 11/25/2011 3:14 PM, bil...@aol.com wrote: There is no problem at all with Krugman's goal, be objective first, then choose a political conclusion based on the facts as you find them. It certainly is a prime RC principle..   Yet, maybe it takes an additional operating principle simply to actually approach objectivity in any meaningful sense. Namely : Both R & L are guaranteed to be wrong at least as often as they may be right.  That is, deep skepticism about the "truth value" of all ideologies is a prerequisite for objectivity.   "Deep skepticism" means exactly that. Visceral skepticism, skepticism  as  Faith in the fallibility of political ideologies.   Not always easy. Year to year, the political winds blow. In the Bush years, especially after 2005, the tendency was to be anti-Republican, at least it was for me. This did not mean being all that much pro-Democratic, but it certainly meant disillusionment with the GOP. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Most of us are generally anti-Democrat and probably will be for the coming year, anyway. No great love for Republicans, just very sour on the Democratic party.   Even if the Republicans win in 2012, to expect any miracles from a new WH seems to be unrealistic. No ideological party is capable of  "getting it right." This leaves us with  the need  to try our best to be objective despite the difficulty involved, and to be philosophical about it.   Radical Centrism =  a form of Zen Buddhism ?   Billy   ==================================================     11/25/2011 11:17:56 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, drer...@radicalcentrism.org writes: I just wish I could reliably tell which economics were empirical and not political... E http://www.mattrichman.net/post/13302185252/math-has-become-politicized Math Has Become Politicized Russ Roberts on Paul Krugman: Krugman is a Keynesian because he wants bigger government. I’m an anti-Keynesian because I want smaller government. Both of us can find evidence for our worldviews. Paul Krugman, responding: Russ Roberts may choose his economic views because they support his political prejudices. I try not to. Maybe I sometimes fall short — but I try to analyze the economy as best I can, never mind what’s politically convenient […] Roberts’ comments perfectly exemplify what I’ve been thinking for a while now. As I see it, there are two types of economists: political and empirical. Political economists start with their political beliefs and then “find evidence†to back up their ideologies. Empirical economists look at the numbers objectively and then figure out what’s best. They don’t don’t start with pre-drawn conclusions (e.g. “smaller government†). They start with an open mind and aren’t afraid to recommend an economic policy that runs antithetically to their political beliefs. That we have certain economists who put politics ahead of math isn’t a problem in and of itself. The problem is that most of our politicians surround themselves with like-minded political economists. Now we’ve come to the point that when a group of empirical economists publishes numbers that don’t align with a politician’s political views, said politician derides the organization as a “reactionary socialist institution†. If we want to get out of the mess we’re in, numbers need to come first — not politics. Posted at 11:26 AM Permalink ∞ -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com>   -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org