Quote (cambovenzi @ Aug 19 2016 08:43pm)
Its fine if you don't want to read it, but writing it off as 'minor' and 'poor' is obviously illegitimate when you haven't read it or even familiarized yourself with the conclusion.
Instead of analyzing the flaws and the validity of the claims you have to appeal to some false 'consensus' to pretend its a super swell book and that criticism is unwarranted..
Its laughably hypocritical when you accuse me of only reading that which agrees with my worldview when you are public fellatiate piketty and krugman and shillfully write off criticism of them for illegitimate fallacious reasons without reading it.
I've emphasised how I don't agree with a lot of the book, but in your black and white worldview you still think I'm up Piketty's arse or something.
Tbh the 'poor' comment was more in reference to the video you linked - I thought they did a bad job of going into the paper. Maybe they didn't intend to and it was just meant to be a pleasant libertarian podcast, which is fine.
I can accept that if you've read that entire paper, you would know the arguments against Piketty's data in more detail than I. However, the insinuation that I am hypocritical is totally false. I guarantee I've read more right wing economic literature than you have left wing. I've got 2 books of your bumboy Ron Paul on my shelf, for example.