Sunday, January 11, 2009
More Evidence on That Class Act, Brad DeLong
UPDATE Below
Readers may recall my brush with greatness when Brad DeLong decided to delete my comment calling him out for saying Mises' work was "bats--- insane." Well, Mario Rizzo has been similarly blessed.
In a recent post with the neutral title, "Stupidest Party Alive," DeLong named Steve Horwitz (as well as others) an "ethics-free Republican hack," for the unimaginable crime of writing the following:
Well Horwitz mentioned this at his home court, and then Mario Rizzo reported:
It's funny because that was my reaction when DeLong deleted my comment. (I played it off like it didn't bother me but "stunned" and "a little hurt" are actually very accurate.)
Now of course, just because Samuelson, Krugman, and DeLong are arrogant jerks doesn't prove that their ideas are wrong. But it doesn't help.
UPDATE: This is too funny. DeLong is such a con man. Before he called Horwitz (and my former undergrad advisor, Gary Wolfram) "ethics-free Republican hacks"--though in fairness, Wolfram would probably gladly put that on his consulting resume--DeLong wrote:
Snoopy in the comments said, "Ummm...hitotsu means 'one item'." I did some quick googling and it seems Snoopy is right.
Doesn't that just epitomize DeLong's style? I wonder if he bluffs a lot in poker too?
Readers may recall my brush with greatness when Brad DeLong decided to delete my comment calling him out for saying Mises' work was "bats--- insane." Well, Mario Rizzo has been similarly blessed.
In a recent post with the neutral title, "Stupidest Party Alive," DeLong named Steve Horwitz (as well as others) an "ethics-free Republican hack," for the unimaginable crime of writing the following:
[Horwitz:] "The stimulus plans assume consumption is the source of economic growth. It is not. It is the consequence of said growth. The ‘stimulus’ is a redistribution of spending, at best, and will do little to help. The next Administration should avoid large scale programs and experimentation and allow the marketplace to correct the errors made by the last 8 years of misguided intervention."
Well Horwitz mentioned this at his home court, and then Mario Rizzo reported:
BRAD DELONG DELETED MY COMMENT!!! I said ad hominem attacks were unprofessional and that calling critics "ethics-free" is terrible.
I am stunned and a little hurt, actually.
What is going on???
It's funny because that was my reaction when DeLong deleted my comment. (I played it off like it didn't bother me but "stunned" and "a little hurt" are actually very accurate.)
Now of course, just because Samuelson, Krugman, and DeLong are arrogant jerks doesn't prove that their ideas are wrong. But it doesn't help.
UPDATE: This is too funny. DeLong is such a con man. Before he called Horwitz (and my former undergrad advisor, Gary Wolfram) "ethics-free Republican hacks"--though in fairness, Wolfram would probably gladly put that on his consulting resume--DeLong wrote:
In fact, no current or former member of the President's Council of Economic Advisers--Democrat or Republican, living or dead, sane or insane--has signed up for the Republican House caucus's list of economists opposed to the stimulus package. None. Zero. Nada. Sifr. Efes. Wala sero. Kosong sifar. 'Ole. Knin. Pujyam. Mann. Dim. Nocht. Null. Meden. Hitotsu. Sifuri. Ling. Sunya. Mwac. Ataqan. Saquui. Hun. Illaq. Wanzi. Wanzi. Pagh. Na. Uqua.
Nobody.
That should tell you something about today's Republican Party.
Snoopy in the comments said, "Ummm...hitotsu means 'one item'." I did some quick googling and it seems Snoopy is right.
Doesn't that just epitomize DeLong's style? I wonder if he bluffs a lot in poker too?
Comments:
DeLong deletes a lot of comments. He has deleted everyone I have ever left at his site (about a dozen or so), none of which were uncivil, but all of which questioned some assertion that DeLong had made in a blog entry. After the last one was deleted about a year ago, I simpy stopped visiting his site. The man is an intellectual coward, and probably a real coward to boot.
# posted by 
: January 11, 2009 at 8:41 PM
: January 11, 2009 at 8:41 PM 
The Blackadder Says:
Aside from the intellectual intolerance/cowardice involved in deleting comments, the whole basis of DeLong's post seems off. DeLong's argument is that since no one on the Council of Economic Advisors is on the house caucus list, this shows that the position is somehow fringy. But the list (which is available here) is just a collection of quotes by various economists critical of the stimulus plan. And while the list doesn't provide quotes from any Council of Economic Advisors alums, there's no reason why the list couldn't have done so. Mankiw, for example, has been critical of the stimulus package. So unless DeLong's point is simply that the House Caucus did a bad job of compiling criticisms of the stimulus (which it clearly isn't) I don't see what his point is.
Aside from the intellectual intolerance/cowardice involved in deleting comments, the whole basis of DeLong's post seems off. DeLong's argument is that since no one on the Council of Economic Advisors is on the house caucus list, this shows that the position is somehow fringy. But the list (which is available here) is just a collection of quotes by various economists critical of the stimulus plan. And while the list doesn't provide quotes from any Council of Economic Advisors alums, there's no reason why the list couldn't have done so. Mankiw, for example, has been critical of the stimulus package. So unless DeLong's point is simply that the House Caucus did a bad job of compiling criticisms of the stimulus (which it clearly isn't) I don't see what his point is.
# posted by : January 11, 2009 at 10:21 PM
: January 11, 2009 at 10:21 PM
Poor Delong. He needs some lessons in Ethics.... and in Japanese too.
# posted by : January 12, 2009 at 3:05 AM
: January 12, 2009 at 3:05 AM
(Sorry typo.)
Silas,
Seriously man, if you can't see the difference between DeLong deleting someone's post who simply said, "You shouldn't call other people names," and me deleting your post for calling me names (the 50th time you do it), then...I don't know what.
Silas,
Seriously man, if you can't see the difference between DeLong deleting someone's post who simply said, "You shouldn't call other people names," and me deleting your post for calling me names (the 50th time you do it), then...I don't know what.
No, Bob_Murphy, I know at least one time when you deleted my post when all I did was relate a recent error of yours to a previous. You didn't even let me know about it. And I don't remember *ever* calling you a name. Show me where I did that. Just because I pointed out your errors in a way that made you feel as bad *as if* you had been called a name, doesn't mean I called you a name.
And there's not a single thing I can do about your habit of tossing us such gems as "It would be a market solution if people charged others for a quantity of CO2 [gas] being injected into their property", or when you lie about my position on geo-engineering. (Still no apology btw.) All of that is your responsibility, not mine. Don't blame me for pointing it out.
If you can't see the similarity between DeLong purging comments that embarass him, and your treatment of me ... then I don't know what.
And there's not a single thing I can do about your habit of tossing us such gems as "It would be a market solution if people charged others for a quantity of CO2 [gas] being injected into their property", or when you lie about my position on geo-engineering. (Still no apology btw.) All of that is your responsibility, not mine. Don't blame me for pointing it out.
If you can't see the similarity between DeLong purging comments that embarass him, and your treatment of me ... then I don't know what.
"[J]ust because Samuelson, Krugman, and DeLong are arrogant jerks doesn't prove that their ideas are wrong."
Maybe not, but the fact that they are such liars and bullies strongly suggests that not only are they wrong, but they know they are wrong.
However, because Bob Murphy allows the yammering of Silas Barta regarding the CO2 global warming hoax shows Bob to be a very nice guy. Nicer than I am, certainly.
Maybe not, but the fact that they are such liars and bullies strongly suggests that not only are they wrong, but they know they are wrong.
However, because Bob Murphy allows the yammering of Silas Barta regarding the CO2 global warming hoax shows Bob to be a very nice guy. Nicer than I am, certainly.
# posted by : January 12, 2009 at 12:27 PM
: January 12, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Silas, if Bob was in DeLong's class, would you two be having this discussion?
Bob's basically a pretty nice guy - and rather remarkably so, I'd say (even if like everyone else he doesn't always respond on point to criticism)
Bob's basically a pretty nice guy - and rather remarkably so, I'd say (even if like everyone else he doesn't always respond on point to criticism)
TokyoTom: Sure, I'll accept that Bob_Murphy isn't as bad as DeLong, but that still doesn't mean he hasn't abused admin privileges to delete relevant criticisms.
I think the real question is: why do we rely on authors to provide a neutral forum for discussing their own writings? Of course there's going to be some bias. Our discussion model is broken.
If you really care about the problem, you should be promoting the use of some external forum for discussions like this. We need to replace our current fragmented, unreliable system of blog comments with something more open and universal. Something based on Usenet, perhaps?
Post a Comment
If you really care about the problem, you should be promoting the use of some external forum for discussions like this. We need to replace our current fragmented, unreliable system of blog comments with something more open and universal. Something based on Usenet, perhaps?
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]