According to Focus (last year it was top 100). For full details see Focus-Economics-Finance-Blogs . This is non-trivial in that 17 blogs that were on last year are off. There are 18 new ones, and the total number rose from 100 to 101. I note that Brian Dowd who runs this has us more accurately described. We are no longer a finance blog, which was how we were labeled last year. Now we are a "left-wing" blog. I am not mentioned personally now (and there is no photo) with nobody mentioned by name. We are a group. We write well, drawing on quotes from media or blogosphere, and even if somebody disagrees with us, we are always "funny and interesting to read." I shall not complain.
Barkley Rosser.
Econoblogosphere: The flawed Top 101
ReplyDeleteComment on Barkley Rosser on ‘EconoSpeak Again A Top 101 Economics-Finance Blog’
Economics is a failed science. Fact is that the four main approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent and all got the pivotal economic concept profit wrong. After 200+ years, economics is still at the level of a proto-science or what Feynman called a cargo cult science.
It is a historical fact that theoretical economics (= science) had been hijacked from the very beginning by political economists (= agenda pushers). Political economics, though, is not guided by the principles of Science but by the principles of Circus Maximus. Accordingly, in soapbox economics anything goes; in theoretical economics, the scientific standards of material and formal consistency are observed.
It is the defining characteristic of the topsy-turvy world of cargo cult science that fake scientists produce fake science “They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. ... But it doesn’t work. ... So I call these things cargo cult science because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential.” (Feynman)
In economics, the violation of scientific standards takes many forms. A scientist, for example, accepts refutation. However, as already Morgenstern realized, this is not what can be observed in economics: “In economics we should strive to proceed, wherever we can, exactly according to the standards of the other, more advanced, sciences, where it is not possible, once an issue has been decided, to continue to write about it as if nothing had happened.”
The fake scientist in the econoblogosphere is, quite naturally, not enthusiastic about critique/refutation but sees to it that it vanishes as fast as possible from his blog or makes sure that it is blocked from the outset.
The whole extent of manipulation/corruption is, of course, unknown. What is known, though, is that at least four blogs of the Top 101 routinely suppress critique/refutation. As a result, the best economics stuff is NOT to be found on the blogs but in their spam folders. This is how the topsy-turvy world of cargo cult science works.
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Mark Thoma’s spam folder
https://axecorg.blogspot.de/2018/01/cryptoeconomics-best-of-mark-thomas.html
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Nick Rowe’s spam folder
https://axecorg.blogspot.de/2018/01/cryptoeconomics-best-of-nick-rowes-spam.html
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Bill Mitchell’s spam folder
https://axecorg.blogspot.de/2018/01/cryptoeconomics-best-of-bill-mitchells.html
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Lars Syll’s spam folder
https://axecorg.blogspot.de/2018/01/cryptoeconomics-best-of-lars-sylls-spam.html
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
Thanks for your supporting comment, Egmont. We are worthy of being denounced by you, :-).
ReplyDelete