Note on Economic Fame
What does it take to make a good economist? Or at least a famous one?
Great economic insight, sometimes at par with contemporaries, sometimes exceptional ability... and one crack-pot theory to set yourself apart from the pack.
Seriously, Rothbard has a knack for explaining things with exquisite analogies. But his stance on currency? *Gag*
And Friedman, so wise, so omniscient in the field. Heralder and harbinger of the greatest truths of 20th century economics, and all at least 10 years before we all started believing him. But his stance on the Fed? I mean, he had to have read SOMETHING good about it!
Keynes gave me reason to participate in the electoral process. He showed that governments do matter, as the largest consumer in an economy. But I just can't touch EVERY market failure as a justification of his theories. There is a natural limit to how much government one can stand. Someone ask Pinochet... oh, never mind.
Oh, and Nash? Well, I guess you can be right about EVERYTHING. But not everyone has his unique grasp on reality.
1 comment:
I accidentally rejected Nathan's last post to this article, so here it is republished. - JRH
juris naturalist said:
Or one crack-pot pack to set yourself among...
Post a Comment