"It was with much amusement that I read Michael Ambrosi's comments.  Amusement because I remain puzzled as to why some historians of economic thought can't seem to shed their Keynesian beliefs in the face of analysis clearly contradicting them ... I'm getting to the point of accepting that some people just can't be helped with arguments or clarifications.  It's just a waste of time.  Would that I did not encounter them in the academic refereeing process ..."

There are ex-Marxists and ex-Keynesians: where are the ex-Austrians?

RL 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan G Isaac" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, 15 November, 2013 5:32:40 AM
Subject: Re: [SHOE] Hayek and trade unions

On 11/14/2013 4:13 PM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> I remain puzzled as to why some historians of economic thought
 > can't seem to shed their Keynesian beliefs in the face of analysis clearly
> contradicting them.


Perhaps because they care about the empirical evidence:
http://equitablegrowth.org/2013/11/12/622/oh-dear-megan-mcardle-relies-on-john-cochrane-and-so-goes-badly-astray

hth,
Alan Isaac