Merry Christmas. For those of you who are actually surfing the net today, you might enjoy Art Carden’s Forbes piece on how economists ruined Christmas.
To read the comments on a post, or to add a comment, you can click on the title of that post.
Search:
______________________________
Recent Posts
- What Is It Like to Talk Batty?
- Live From Warwick
- Your President Hopes You’re Stupid
- Pro and Contra-ception
- Rock On
- Why Jews Don’t Farm
- Laugh of the Day
- Where to Find Me
- Public Service Announcement
- Wisdom from the Ivy League
- In Which Paul Krugman Leaves Me At a Loss for Words
- Mitt Romney’s Taxes
- On the Road Again
- Off the Deep End
- How to Fix Everything
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009

I couldn’t use that link, but this:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/artcarden/2011/12/18/ruining-christmas-an-economists-guide/
Wrong headline in Forbes. It should be: Ruining Christmas: An Austrian Economist’s Guide
David Wallin: Link fixed. Thanks.
I assumed at first that the link was going to be to this article, “Macro Santa And The Austerity Grinch”. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/beltway/2011/12/22/macro-santa-and-the-austerity-grinch/) which I also enjoyed.
One of the problems with charity efficiency analysis is the creamed corn food drive example. Yes, food drives may appear to be less efficient than just giving out cash to the needy. However, if food drives raise cans to give away and cash drives raise no or very little cash — are food drives truly less efficient?
A propos to nothing, but the link shows first shows me this:
Not an accurate quote, but a true sentiment: Napoleon did not speak English.
Then again, “impossible” is spelled the same in English and French, so it probably WAS a word in Napoleon’s dictionary after all.
Unless Napoleon didn’t own a dictionary…?