tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post3762945048369156261..comments2024-03-28T09:32:23.535-05:00Comments on The Grumpy Economist: The cancel culture twitter mob comes to economicsJohn H. Cochranehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04842601651429471525noreply@blogger.comBlogger146125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-27887787117978695592021-05-06T11:43:18.580-05:002021-05-06T11:43:18.580-05:00And 11 months later, police have been substantiall...And 11 months later, police have been substantially defunded in many Democrat led cities, and crime has skyrocketed in the USA - a truly marvelous accomplishment.JDaveFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16667129436131986166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-14970867365006558702020-11-18T15:37:17.162-06:002020-11-18T15:37:17.162-06:00Representative Cedric Richmond (Democratic Louisia...Representative Cedric Richmond (Democratic Louisiana) said Tuesday that President Donald Trump should facilitate a "full-fledged transition" between his administration and the in coming one of President-elect Biden.<br /><br />https://us-president-tweets.blogspot.com/2020/11/cedric-richmond-chides-donald-trump.html?m=1See Through Vloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17749849795472547981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-11533022038889826212020-07-11T18:12:10.412-05:002020-07-11T18:12:10.412-05:00Do you know how many blacks were left out of this ...Do you know how many blacks were left out of this "vigorous and open debate" due to Jim Crow? Or how many innocent citizens were tarred and feathered during the era of McCarthyism? Do you realize that simply being gay was reason enough for people to treat you like a subhuman (see Oliver Sipple)?<br /><br />You could say that the academy was a place of open debate, as long as you were the right demographic and only willing to debate the right topics. Free speech may be under attack today, but let's not pretend that it was any better in the past.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-50929368020720765482020-07-08T17:03:55.329-05:002020-07-08T17:03:55.329-05:00If the US (and, by corollary, the Free World) want...If the US (and, by corollary, the Free World) wants to have any hope of surviving in the face of rising tyranny, it is high time that marxism (and its grievance-studies edition in particular) be exposed for the pure evil that it is and put in the dustbin of history right beside its fellow nazism. If allowed to fester, nothing will be more devastating to black lives than the BLM movement, just as nothing has been more devastating to proletarian lives than the "parties of the proletariat".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-40742887566257084132020-07-04T20:41:56.749-05:002020-07-04T20:41:56.749-05:00It's actually redolent of an adult refusing to...It's actually redolent of an adult refusing to capitulate to the present day version of 1960s mobs screaming "don't trust anyone over the age of 30."<br /><br />Uhlig has no obligation to hold much regard for the work of a bunch of lawyers who publish in a law journal, whose articles are vetted by some law school students.MarcusCrassushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08887104604830853681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-1015263635011775392020-07-04T05:29:26.265-05:002020-07-04T05:29:26.265-05:00Uhlig's patronising comment "time for sen...Uhlig's patronising comment "time for sensible adults to enter back into the room" is disrespectful on two counts. Firstly it is redolent of racists calling black men "boy"; secondly it ignores academics who have written on defunding police and related issues. See for example https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2020/06/harvard-experts-discuss-how-to-effect-lasting-change/ and a whole issue of the Harvard Law Review in 2019 on abolition of prisons. <br />Uhlig's naïveté is what brings into question his editorship.Joe Pearlmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00078441037765021649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-89974078171428113832020-07-03T22:39:39.116-05:002020-07-03T22:39:39.116-05:00oh please, as if being condescending is a crime wh...oh please, as if being condescending is a crime when those he was responding to were being rude jerks themselves. "serves your ends well" eh?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08153373132717840183noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-50571308560260361092020-06-30T09:26:55.253-05:002020-06-30T09:26:55.253-05:00You forgot to highlight the tweets which were cond...You forgot to highlight the tweets which were condescending to those who disagreed with him on the twitter feed you are talking about. Serves your ends well, I supposeMalulihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16599766475252919858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-46067696050744651322020-06-29T13:41:44.109-05:002020-06-29T13:41:44.109-05:00It was definitely condescending, but being condesc...It was definitely condescending, but being condescending alone shouldn't be a firing offense. As others mentioned, as a tactical matter it was dumb (and frankly also just rude), not a firing offense IMO. Michael Stackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06879136691984411820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-37775760599493620352020-06-27T10:44:45.274-05:002020-06-27T10:44:45.274-05:00Having read Mr Welch's excellent corpfin text,...Having read Mr Welch's excellent corpfin text, as well as numerous op-eds from Mr Krugman, I posit that proof of an econ/fin assertion may be met by either of two sufficiently persuasive standards: <br />• Mr Welch agrees with it.<br />• Mr Krugman rants against it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-13262247669071315312020-06-25T14:41:06.817-05:002020-06-25T14:41:06.817-05:00Nonsense. There was nothing wrong with his tweets....Nonsense. There was nothing wrong with his tweets.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17625007830941119061noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-47174294296212812462020-06-25T10:02:46.810-05:002020-06-25T10:02:46.810-05:00One is left wondering at Justin Wolfers's moti...One is left wondering at Justin Wolfers's motives. Wolfers in his latest tweet (see above) slanders Uhlig in a way that no honorable person could accept. Nowhere in the sequence of tweets by Uhlig is there least suggestion that Uhlig is supporting "racists".<br /><br />Wolfers needs to be placed under investigation by the AEA for violation of the association's code of ethics.Old Eagle Eyehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05270080708077871311noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-71666213425513536562020-06-24T12:06:21.482-05:002020-06-24T12:06:21.482-05:00Speaking with Marsh McLuhan, the medium is the mes...Speaking with Marsh McLuhan, the medium is the message!Frank https://www.blogger.com/profile/00272351675231621678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-61835392714446130832020-06-24T02:26:33.292-05:002020-06-24T02:26:33.292-05:00From the way his comments are phrased, Uhlig doesn...From the way his comments are phrased, Uhlig doesn't come over like a very amiable guy. But what's happening to him regarding his comments on defunding the police is ridiculous.Mark Dijkstrahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06024537346795617009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-47735671137451135112020-06-23T22:02:00.920-05:002020-06-23T22:02:00.920-05:00Good to see you here, Mark. Hi. Good to see you here, Mark. Hi. Eric Rasmusenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609599580545475695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-54854634581464606252020-06-23T21:11:19.418-05:002020-06-23T21:11:19.418-05:00Update: Will this pacify the twitter mob? Justin W...Update: Will this pacify the twitter mob? Justin Wolfers already chimes in, completely disregarding the facts at hand.<br /><br />It's not about facts; it's about power.Frank https://www.blogger.com/profile/00272351675231621678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-50169916154730183882020-06-23T17:49:08.813-05:002020-06-23T17:49:08.813-05:00As Cochrane rightly asserts, the substance of Uhli...As Cochrane rightly asserts, the substance of Uhlig's tweets is defensible. But both the timing and the tone are spectacularly awful, and call into question Uhlig's character and stability, to say nothing of his fitness for a position of great power. Was his tweeting an impulsive act? Or was it done after careful reflection? Neither explanation leads to an acquittal here.<br />JZhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12994372644670111315noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-38790633376058013892020-06-23T17:39:08.352-05:002020-06-23T17:39:08.352-05:00Btw, did you hear what's up with Berkeley Econ...Btw, did you hear what's up with Berkeley Econ PhD students and EJMR?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-32838909306350861272020-06-23T17:34:04.977-05:002020-06-23T17:34:04.977-05:00Professor Cochrane writes: "I spent much of ...Professor Cochrane writes: "I spent much of my last few years of teaching afraid that I would say something that could be misunderstood and thus be offensive to someone. Many of my colleagues report the same worries. It is not good for open and honest communication in the classroom if a tweet about a comment six years ago can instantly destroy you."<br /><br />One of the reasons I'm glad that I never went into academia. The federal government is almost as bad (the pension is better though). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-32545143920883352202020-06-23T08:07:04.897-05:002020-06-23T08:07:04.897-05:00law and policy don't work with character judge...law and policy don't work with character judgement.<br /><br />Judging and rewarding actions are the tried and true method for an effective legal system and organization. Behaviors can be observed, character cannot. Behavior can be helpful, character is not. That's why every legal code on the planet focuses on behavior rather than character. That's why religions or societies focused on faith rarely develop practical legal or economic systems independently.<br /><br />Legal systems based on character judgement are usually just covers for corruption or discrimination. You can never prove you have good character, so lack of "faith" or "commitment to the communist party" or "racism" or whatever have always been used by corrupt governments to put enemies behind bars.<br /><br />Unfortunately, much of the US legal and judicial system is based on making character judgement rather than behavior judgement. Law, in the eyes of many, is just to find an excuse to put bad people away. The character judgement discretion that law enforcement have is the source of incredible discrepancies in punishment for the same action.<br /><br />It is incredibly ironic that the same people that suffer so much from a legal code based on character rather than behavior are the same people who support its application on others. Fish Goldsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13864053986442147618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-4301707233388449492020-06-23T00:58:53.985-05:002020-06-23T00:58:53.985-05:00University of Chicago President Robert Zimmer is l...University of Chicago President Robert Zimmer is looking good. I recently learned how his predecessor Hugo Sonnenschein, an economist (to my shame) and a nice guy did worse. See how he responded in 1998 to a demand from Mayor Richie Daley of Chicago that he fire John Lott, a much more abrasive person then Harald Uhlig who is the bete noire of the gun control crowd. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/my-scary-encounter-with-chicagos-mayor-richard-daley History is going to look a lot more kindly on Mr. Zimmer than on Mr. Sonnenschein. Eric Rasmusenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609599580545475695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-9283962130731573082020-06-23T00:40:12.965-05:002020-06-23T00:40:12.965-05:00I'm puzzled. I read this to mean that he has h...I'm puzzled. I read this to mean that he has had enough experience with reporters from those two publications to know that they are out to destroy people like him. I wouldn't be surprised, even tho in my own cancelling, the NYT reporter was one of the few who, tho biased, were fair. I considered threatening one of the Washington Post reporters with publicly shaming her to other reporters (she of course wouldn't care about other kinds of people) after she wrote an article for which she didn't try to contact me and in which she falsely said I had written an article on women in academia, whereas I had merely quoted an interesting tangential comment from it (the WP did issue a correction after 8 hours or so--- probably some reader pointed the mistake out to them). Anybody who has had dealing with the mainstream media knows they lie and twist routinely, with some publicaoitns much worse than others. See my advice on it at http://www.rasmusen.org/special/2019kerfuffle/lessons.htm. You can deal with them, but only like you can deal with Persian rug dealers or used car salesmen, on a friendly but cautious basis.Eric Rasmusenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609599580545475695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-8539233502037007762020-06-23T00:29:50.284-05:002020-06-23T00:29:50.284-05:00Andy, I'm afraid I agree with the "own go...Andy, I'm afraid I agree with the "own goal" comment. Dictators tend to be people who like conquering countries; you need to realize that they aren't as nice people as you are. <br /> If I may advertise, I wonder what you think of my attempt at applied game theory? --- Eric B. Rasmusen, "Conventional Artillery and Nuclear Missiles in North Korea," RealClearDefense (May 12, 2017), http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/05/12/conventional_artillery_and_nuclear__missiles_in_north_korea_111363.html. Korea analysts have paid too little attention to the credibility of threats. A danger of North Korean nuclear missiles is that they make credible the threat to use conventional artillery to shell Seoul if ransom is not paid.<br />Eric Rasmusenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609599580545475695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-87250597351128738182020-06-22T12:50:49.833-05:002020-06-22T12:50:49.833-05:00Thanks John for writing on the situation and, in p...Thanks John for writing on the situation and, in particular, for providing background and steps in your arguments, which clearly people are then able to criticize. By contrast, both Wolfers and Krugman make a precise policy recommendation, Uhlig is unfit to edit, yet neither feels an obligation to outline how Uhlig's writings support that conclusion (keeping in mind that the classroom incident came to light after their pronouncements). That form of persuasion is not befitting the issues here.Mark Bilsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-582368152716771238.post-41798134707285801562020-06-21T19:35:07.472-05:002020-06-21T19:35:07.472-05:00That's the (real) free market fellows. ;)That's the (real) free market fellows. ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com