http://www.micromotives.com/2006/08/the-economist-examines-the-origin-of-wealth/ The Science & Art of Decision Making Fri, 08 May 2009 14:29:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.micromotives.com/2006/08/the-economist-examines-the-origin-of-wealth/comment-page-1/#comment-1658 ideogenetic Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:57:19 +0000 http://www.micromotives.com/2006/08/the-economist-examines-the-origin-of-wealth/#comment-1658 The Economist might be engaging in a bit of "circling the wagons". All these years they have practiced what Beinhocker calls "traditional economics". It would be difficult for the publisher to realize, and for The Economist to admit to their readers, their entire catalogue of issues is based on antiquated, perhaps irrelevant and unfounded, theory. The Economist might be engaging in a bit of “circling the wagons”. All these years they have practiced what Beinhocker calls “traditional economics”. It would be difficult for the publisher to realize, and for The Economist to admit to their readers, their entire catalogue of issues is based on antiquated, perhaps irrelevant and unfounded, theory.

]]> http://www.micromotives.com/2006/08/the-economist-examines-the-origin-of-wealth/comment-page-1/#comment-129 Michael Cheng Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:29:47 +0000 http://www.micromotives.com/2006/08/the-economist-examines-the-origin-of-wealth/#comment-129 Jeff, thanks for that update on review of the book. I think you're right about reservations from any immediate unequivocal acceptance of such a radical idea. The value of the feedback, however, is that hopefully a dialogue will ensue. Interestingly (and sarcasm/irony aside), there could be much more discussion based on content rather on how widely accepted a certain viewpoint (which ever perspective) turns out to have. Anyways, thanks again for the post. Jeff, thanks for that update on review of the book. I think you’re right about reservations from any immediate unequivocal acceptance of such a radical idea. The value of the feedback, however, is that hopefully a dialogue will ensue. Interestingly (and sarcasm/irony aside), there could be much more discussion based on content rather on how widely accepted a certain viewpoint (which ever perspective) turns out to have. Anyways, thanks again for the post.

]]>