Thomas E. Woods, Jr., is the New York Times bestselling author of 11 books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History and Meltdown (on the financial crisis.) A senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Woods has appeared on MSNBC, CNBC, FOX News, FOX Business, C-SPAN, Bloomberg Television, and hundreds of radio programs... (Read More)
Bob Murphy, who has the well-known challenge to Paul Krugman I’ve been talking about, will be debating Warren Mosler, an advocate of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). Details will be forthcoming.
It’s fun to read the comments in the post announcing the debate. Here’s one:
“Robert Murphy is just going to parrot the same talking points that Peter Schiff has been using for years. He wants to cut federal spending by a trillion dollars the first year. Warren is wasting his time debating this guy.”
“Human beings interacting with each other freely can’t possibly create a stable, prosperous economy. Stable, prosperous economies emerge only when people with guns make us fork over our dough to them. If we cut back on how many of society’s resources these people with guns may control, we’ll surely be impoverished. I can’t think of any way society could function or the economy could flourish without their wise oversight. Therefore, there is no way society could function or the economy could flourish without their wise oversight. Warren is wasting his time debating this guy.”
I especially like this one:
“Warren is a humble guy and sets the bar for polite public discourse, and while I think it may be beneath his stature to debate someone like this, the fact of the matter is that these people are standing in the way of progress, and some level of engagement is necessary to expose their own to the fallacies that dominate their views.”
“Although the entire policy community is committed to fiscal and monetary stimulus, as are the Federal Reserve and both political parties, with even the 2012 GOP nominee insisting that budget cuts cause depressions, the Austrians, who have zero influence when set against the entire establishment, are ‘standing in the way of progress’ by thinking that there might be something wrong with the economy that can’t be solved by something-for-nothing trickery.”