News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by IslaDeEncanta on Sunday April 02, 2017 @01:27AM (#14015943)
The Economist is basic neoclassical nonsense dressed up as nuance. I wouldn't want my name on it either.
Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by FabHK on Sunday April 02, 2017 @01:41PM (#14018082)
Your opinion reflects a common prejudice, but I don't think it holds up when you read it occasionally.
Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by dredmorbius on Sunday April 02, 2017 @11:12PM (#14020364)
Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by IslaDeEncanta on Tuesday April 04, 2017 @10:32PM (#14039186)
I'd be interested in recommendations for an article that isn't rooted in neoclassical thought.
Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by FabHK on Thursday April 06, 2017 @01:00PM (#14052377)
I assume you mean neoclassical economics with its focus on markets, efficiency, utility and profit maximisation, etc., and its assumption of full information.

First, I'd say that The Economist's stance these days incorporates Keynesian thought, and as such might be closer to the neoclassical synthesis, but I'd argue it goes beyond that.

At any rate, below are some articles just from the last week or two that are somewhat more progressive, or touch on aspects that neoclassical economics tended to ignore.

Maybe you'd like to highlight some articles that are off target by being rooted in neoclassical thought?

* TE applauds Sesame Street for introducing a character with autism (https://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2017/04/ok)

* TE criticises proposals for "extreme vetting" at US immigration (http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2017/04/not-so-smart)

* TE writes about slow improvements in mental health care in India (http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21719808-suicide-rate-rem...)

* TE laments Trump's attacks on the UN (http://www.economist.com/news/international/21719467-preside...)

* TE writes about global poverty, and notes that "India and countries like it need proper welfare systems", and "A broadly poverty-free world, but with sad, durable exceptions, is not good enough." (http://www.economist.com/news/international/21719790-going-w...)

* "US proposed budget cuts would be bad for environment" (http://www.economist.com/news/international/21719466-and-sig...)

Some older articles:

* "Happily, despite Mr Schäuble’s macho rhetoric, the pace of tightening in the euro zone is slowing." "the world needs fiscal policy driven not by faith [in austerity], but by reason." (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565211-debate-about-...)

* "A decent deal would have put Greece on the path to sustainable growth and taken the prospect of Grexit off the table. Instead, Europe has cooked up the same old recipe of austerity and implausible assumptions." (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21657806-deal-between-...)

* TE argues against "the war on drugs" (http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21650112-one-war-drugs...)

* TE on information asymmetry, and in favour of fiduciary duty (http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2017/02/who-guards...)

Re:Why are The Economist’s writers anonymous? by seanmcdirmid on Sunday April 02, 2017 @01:49AM (#14015998)
What would you want your name on then?