I ha you to modify yesterday's comment because I had put the book down, the night before, just pages before encountering comment-invalidating evidence - all in a good way.
1) That "mini-bio" of Herbert Hoover turned out to be a preview of an intriguing supporting-actor performance by HH - from which much of the information comes from a bo…
I ha you to modify yesterday's comment because I had put the book down, the night before, just pages before encountering comment-invalidating evidence - all in a good way.
1) That "mini-bio" of Herbert Hoover turned out to be a preview of an intriguing supporting-actor performance by HH - from which much of the information comes from a book I thought had been forgotten, Ellsworth's Carlson's "The Kaiping Mines." I mention this with happiness because Ells was the father of my best friend in high school and a significant mentor to me in my pre-(first generation)-college years. Fine book, wonderful man. I miss him.
2) And it's clear that if we're not going to get all the Schumpeter I asked for, it's going to be more than I expected. The obvious simplification of having Hayek and Polanyi stand in for the great dilemmas of modern growth and development is getting buttressed left and right with other examples. It's a teaching device - and if it's a something of a brute force tactic to boil modern con down to a question about the scope and role of markets, I can't deny that's exactly the term around which positions get staked out on the Twitterverse, and it's completely justified to meet students at their point of engagement with political economy, insist that the point they are making in fact has two sides, and then lead them into the discovery that it has many sides. I would have loved hearing the lecture versions of these chapters, and it's wonderful that the book preserves Brad's lecturing voice and style, so I can.
I ha you to modify yesterday's comment because I had put the book down, the night before, just pages before encountering comment-invalidating evidence - all in a good way.
1) That "mini-bio" of Herbert Hoover turned out to be a preview of an intriguing supporting-actor performance by HH - from which much of the information comes from a book I thought had been forgotten, Ellsworth's Carlson's "The Kaiping Mines." I mention this with happiness because Ells was the father of my best friend in high school and a significant mentor to me in my pre-(first generation)-college years. Fine book, wonderful man. I miss him.
2) And it's clear that if we're not going to get all the Schumpeter I asked for, it's going to be more than I expected. The obvious simplification of having Hayek and Polanyi stand in for the great dilemmas of modern growth and development is getting buttressed left and right with other examples. It's a teaching device - and if it's a something of a brute force tactic to boil modern con down to a question about the scope and role of markets, I can't deny that's exactly the term around which positions get staked out on the Twitterverse, and it's completely justified to meet students at their point of engagement with political economy, insist that the point they are making in fact has two sides, and then lead them into the discovery that it has many sides. I would have loved hearing the lecture versions of these chapters, and it's wonderful that the book preserves Brad's lecturing voice and style, so I can.