You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: My Response to the Atlantic's The Curse of Econ 101

in #economics7 years ago

Usually people who admire Nordic countries don't want to see it. It comes from the bad institutions, which originally were set up by well-meaning people to help the workers. But it's really difficult to produce good regulation and find the optimal level for taxation so it all failed. And now we can't get rid of those institutions and have to live with them.

Very well said. Institutions and organizations (especially government ones) are like organisms whose sole purpose is to survive and multiply. Killing them off is quite difficult.

IMHO libertarian activists could be much more efficient if they would test what kind of argumentation is best and use it, and not stick to the kind of that just feels good.

Great point, but the challenge for me is giving up the perceived "moral high ground" in doing so. If the argument is based on a morally superior stance, that's the one I want to use while appealing to a virtue ethics perspective. If clickbait headlines and such are more effective, is that really the direction we want humanity to go? Maybe it's an ends justify the means thing... but it's certainly a tricky thing to figure out. You might get what you want only to realize you lost your way along the path and are now at a completely different destination because the moral framework has shifted.

Sort:  

Great point, but the challenge for me is giving up the perceived "moral high ground" in doing so.

You can use the moral high ground, but don't use it as your primary argument. If somebody wants to talk how economics 101 is too simplified, you should first address that. After you have built a good argument based on economics, you can add "and btw, my stance is also morally superior".

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.20
TRX 0.13
JST 0.030
BTC 65092.40
ETH 3470.06
USDT 1.00
SBD 2.50