by So for the fourth year in a row, we along with our closely associated blog, Angry Bear, have been listed as among the top 100 economics blogs. We continue to be put into the category of "financial economics," as we were last year, with little change in our description.But, hey, I am not going to complain. Quite a few blogs formerly on the list are off, replaced by the up and coming. If there is a part of the description of us I am uncomfortable with it is the claim, made in the past as well, that we are "complicated" and that people not well-informed about economics should avoid our blog. I do not think this is generally the case, although I can appreciate that some threads have gotten off into some obscure points.But, I suspect that we shall not change much in response to any of that.
Topics:
Barkley Rosser considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Elon Musk (& Vivek Ramaswamy) on hardship, because he knows so much about it
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Klas Eklunds ‘Vår ekonomi’ — lärobok med stora brister
New Economics Foundation writes We need more than a tax on the super rich to deliver climate and economic justice
Robert Vienneau writes Profits Not Explained By Merit, Increased Risk, Increased Ability To Compete, Etc.
But, hey, I am not going to complain. Quite a few blogs formerly on the list are off, replaced by the up and coming. If there is a part of the description of us I am uncomfortable with it is the claim, made in the past as well, that we are "complicated" and that people not well-informed about economics should avoid our blog. I do not think this is generally the case, although I can appreciate that some threads have gotten off into some obscure points.
But, I suspect that we shall not change much in response to any of that. In any case, I would prefer to be on this list than off, even if I have some disagreements with some of how we are described and categorized.
Barkley Rosser