The World Paul Volcker Made
- Total Posts: 8,843
(For whatever reason the hamsters don’t like the text of this article. But it is worth reading)
December 26, 2018 at 11:49 AM #5144retired liberalParticipant
- Total Posts: 5,107
It did not work for me either. Running it through Notepad, did not fix it. Neither did pasting as text. And Clear Formatting didn’t do anything.
I didn’t see any naughty words there either. The only thing I can think of it just plain too many words.
That wasn’t it either. The first two paragraphs only still wouldn’t post.
It sure would be nice if it would clue the poster in, as to what the problem is. If a word(s), list them.
We are an arrogant species, believing our fantasy based "facts" are better than the other person's fake facts.
If Row vs. Wade is overturned, women could lose the right to not get pregnant in 26 states.
The Republicans are four year olds. The Democrats are six year olds. There are no grownups.
Normalizing insanity has been the conservative's sweet spot at very least since the beginning..
January 3, 2019 at 2:42 AM #7870
January 3, 2019 at 2:53 AM #7871
January 3, 2019 at 3:13 AM #7876
The Chicago School’s long descent
by Michael Hudson
As a graduate of the University of Chicago (1959) and also of its Laboratory School (1955-56), I think my experience there confirms the picture portrayed by Henry Liu in his wonderful essay last week on Milton Friedman and the “Money Matters Controversy”. (See Friedman’s misplaced monument, Sep 5.)
My introduction to the University of Chicago (UC) was via the Manhattan Project around 1948. I lived in Chicago neighborhood of Kenwood, just north of Hyde Park. We rented the top floor of our house to a physicist, Shuki Hayashi, who worked on the project at Stagg Field, under whose bleachers the project’s atomic pile still continued. To bring me to the Lab School, he would put me on his bike (a Raleigh DL-1 28-incher) and drive me up to the field. Only much later in my life was I left to wonder what has been more dangerous to humanity: the A-bomb or Chicago School monetarism?
The home page for Micheal Hudson’s Website: https://michael-hudson.com/
January 3, 2019 at 3:22 AM #7879
Friedman’s Misplaced Monument
By Henry C K Liu
The University of Chicago’s plans, announced in June, to establish an economics research institute to be named after Nobel Prize-winner Milton Friedman, a free-market monetarist professor at the university from 1946 to 1976, faces strong vocal opposition from none other than Friedman’s own colleagues in the university.
Friedman was widely regarded as the intellectual leader of the Chicago School of monetary economics, which stresses the overwhelming importance of the quantity of money as an instrument of government economic policy and as a determinant of business cycles and inflation. He was also an outspoken public defender of free markets, which he inevitably linked with political freedom.
Friedman was the 1976 recipient of the Nobel/Sveriges Riksbank Prize in economics. The press release of the award cited Friedman’s coining of the term “money matters” or even “only money matters” as an arresting slogan for monetarism. On November 17, 2006, one day after his death at age 94, the Wall Street Journal printed an opinion piece by Friedman entitled: Why Money Matters.
The official press release on the award explained the choice of Friedman as follows:
This strong emphasis on the role of money should be seen in the light of how economists – usually advocates of a narrow interpretation of Keynesian theory – have, for a long time, almost entirely ignored the significance of money and monetary policy when analyzing business cycles and inflation. As far back as the beginning of the fifties, Friedman was a pioneer in the well-founded reaction to the earlier post-Keynesian one-sidedness. And he succeeded – mainly thanks to his independence and brilliance – in initiating a very lively and fruitful scientific debate which has been going on for more than a decade. In fact, the macro-econometric models of today differ greatly from those of a couple of decades ago as far as the monetary factors go – and this is very much thanks to Friedman. The widespread debate on Friedman’s theories also led to a review of monetary policies pursued by central banks – in the first place, in the United States. It is very rare for an economist to wield such influence, directly and indirectly, not only on the direction of scientific research but also on actual policies.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.