Friday, July 7, 2017

Dean Baker — Does the NYT Have to Call them "Free" Trade Agreements?

More BS sophistry sold as "news."

Baker gives the Times the benefit of the doubt. I think that is overly generous considering the history.

In a professional environment, always look to motive rather than ignorance. And when professionals repeatedly make "mistakes," the presumption is that these are not actually mistakes but excuses after being called out.

Beat the Press
Does the NYT Have to Call them "Free" Trade Agreements?
Dean Baker | Co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC

More lack of professionalism, this time in economics.

Adam Smith was not the originator of the "invisible hand" of supply and demand. Paul Samuelson was. Smith used the metaphor in an entirely different context with an entirely different meaning.

Adam Smith's Lost Legacy
How To Ruin a Good Piece on the History of Economic Thought
Gavin Kennedy | Professor Emeritus, Heriot Watt University


djrichard said...

On the flip side, Trump would help his campaign if he said he wasn't against free trade per so so much as he simply wants balanced trade. Force it on his opponents to identify what's bad about balanced trade. Gets him out of the game of fighting "free trade", which as "everyone" knows, is "good".

And if he really wanted to up the ante, talk about what's really needed is balanced trade in goods and services, so that the benefits of the "global supply chain" are divided across a level playing field.

Matt Franko said...

"Always look to motive rather than ignorance"

You have this backwards Tom....

Tom Hickey said...

Following Randy on this one, Matt.

Even if it is ignorance, in the case of professionals it is culpable, as in "ignorance of the law is no excuse."