Tuesday, January 25, 2022

Again One Of The Top 100 Economics Blogs

 I note that on 1/19/22 The Intelligent Economist released its annual list of the top 100 economics blogs.  Both Econospeak and Angry Bear, which we feed into, are on the list, us again as one of the financial economics blogs while AB is in the general economics section.  They again say we are not for beginners due to the "complexity" of things we post and talk about.

Barkley Rosser


run75441 said...


For sure Econospeak is read. I come here to read the conversations too. Congrats . . .

Sandwichman said...

'due to the "complexity" of things we post'

my bad

rickstersherpa@msn.com said...

Congratulations, I check on you, Angry Bear, & Crooked Timber everyday.

AXEC / E.K-H said...

Ranking and topping ― a cargo-cultic ritual
Comment on Barkley Rosser on ‘Again One Of The Top 100 Economics Blogs’

Economists suffer from the bad habit of mutually praising their proto-scientific garbage. The fact of the matter is that economics is failed/fake science. Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent. Economics is scientifically worthless. Economic policy guidance never has had sound scientific foundations. So, the ranking of economics journals or blogs amounts to a periodic spoof of the public.#1, #2

There is no ‘complexity’ whatsoever in the regular contributions to EconoSpeak, it is just plain disinfotainment and misplaced self-hype.

For those who want to check matters for themselves and learn what economics as science looks like, here is a ten-pages working paper:

The logical interface between objective macrofoundations and subjective valuations

Abstract: Economists never managed to consistently integrate micro- and macroeconomics. Walrasian economics is built upon microfoundations. These consist of patently absurd subjective-behavioral assumptions. Keynesian economics is built upon objective-structural macrofoundations. These are algebraically defective. Both approaches get the foundational economic concept of profit wrong. Because the axiomatic foundations are provably false, the whole analytical superstructure of economics is scientifically worthless. The present paper starts with the correct macrofoundations and determines the logical interface between objective market price and the multitude of subjective valuations.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

#1 The real problem with the economics Nobel

#2 Econblogosphere: The flawed Top 101

Anonymous said...

On behalf of Barkley, you can go pound sand!