http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/03/31/japans-nuclear-rescuers-inevitable-die-weeks/”Speaking tearfully through an interpreter by phone, the mother of a 32-year-old worker said: “My son and his colleagues have discussed it at length and they have committed themselves to die if necessary to save the nation.” – There really are men of honor left in this world.
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-31 16:24:00 UTC
“Sometimes, the words of political leaders requires interpretation beyond face value. In Russia’s case, abstention (from the vote on Libya) was a calculated move to *facilitate* intervention. The subsequent instability could eliminate Libya as an oil & gas alternative, thus giving Moscow greater market share – and greater control – in Europe. Making sense now?” – STRATFOR
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-30 10:03:00 UTC
From Economist’s View (In reference to Schiller’s argument (in an exceptional recent paper) that economists should be more interdisciplinary.)
Is Adam Smith Partly an Economist, or Wholly a Moral Philosopher?, by Brad DeLong: Tiago at History of Economics Playground reacted very negatively to an AEA Annual Meeting presentation by Robert Shiller and Virginia Shiller:
This is a question that posits a false dichotomy. The correct question is either: a) “Is adam smith … an econometrician, or a moral philosopher?” He is a moral philosopher. b) “Is adam smith … an economist or an econometrician?” He is an economist. c) “Is an econometrician an economist?” The answer is “No.” An econometrician is a statistician that works on economic data. Why? Economics is a branch of moral philosophy, because the all branches of economics SOLVE for a political end – an end, and an input, without which the profession cannot exist as a discipline. (Yes, that’s right.) Therefore one cannot be an economist unless one is a moral philosopher, unless economics is a branch of statistics, in which case, there are no economic facts because there are no facts without theories. A fact is impossible to define without a theory in which to analyze it. Because being an economist in academia has lost it’s philosophical content, it is possible for Brad to ask this silly question. And if more economists spent more time on philosophy before interpreting statistics, they would understand the erroneous and somewhat ridiculous claims made by the profession are not grounded in demonstrable scientific reality. And they are not grounded in demonstrable scientific reality because economics is currently explanatory, but not predictive.
http://mitnse.com/Why I am not worried about Japan’s nuclear reactors – MIT’s Oehmen
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-15 05:22:00 UTC
http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.101.1.1The Top 20 Articles Of The Past 100 Years from American Economic Review. http://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.101.1.1
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-13 18:48:00 UTC
http://www.openthemagazine.com/article/living/not-as-old-as-you-thinkYoga is a modern invention, and largely American, or at least western rationalist in origin. Not one of my areas of interest, other than the pervasive distribution of thought around the world, and the merging of different bits of it from here and there.
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-13 18:38:00 UTC
http://www.capitalismv3.com/?p=2421Equal opportunity criticism.
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-12 19:48:00 UTC
http://www.capitalismv3.com/index.php/anti-free-market-straw-men-vs-reality/Charged Topic Warning: No free marketer actually suggests ‘unregulated’ market, or the abscence of law. Instead, this is what they say:
Source date (UTC): 2011-03-05 09:23:00 UTC
A Perfect Quote: “Thirty years ago, the public saw teachers as underpaid and overworked professionals trying to prepare the next generation for leadership. These days, the teachers unions are doing their best to present an image of arrogant entitlement combined with an inability to withstand scrutiny and accountability. ” – ED MORRISSEY, of Hot Air Teacher’s unions need to be broken and banned. As Do All Government Employee Unions.
http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/20101202_geopolitical_journey_part_7_polandBrilliant, insightful, and possibly profound advice. As always.
OTOH, I do not think it is a forgone conclusion that a German-Russian Entent is bad for europe or the world. In fact, I think such a relationship is economically, and socially useful for both germany and russia. Such an alliance mat be a necessity that the anglo world should see as a useful and necessary one — largely because ours is fragmenting.
Be
Source date (UTC): 2010-12-03 14:55:00 UTC