| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
| | | | |
| | : No, not in a course on [[microeconomics]]. Check out MIT's course on [[macroeconomics]] and I'm sure it worships Keynes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:56, 31 January 2010 (EST) | | : No, not in a course on [[microeconomics]]. Check out MIT's course on [[macroeconomics]] and I'm sure it worships Keynes.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:56, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | ::[http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Economics/14-02Fall-2004/CourseHome/index.htm Wrong]. He's not mentioned in the lecture notes at all, at least in the most recent macro survey.. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 17:06, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | :::I count at least 4 citations in the reading assignments for 12-452 Spring 2007.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:15, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | Yeah well, apples and oranges. The course you're picking on for not having enough Coase is "14.01 Principles of Microeconomics." 14-452 (not 12, as you wrote), is a course on Macroeconomic Theory--and quite obviously at a more advanced and in-depth level. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 18:11, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | == syllabus does repeatedly mention liberal theories, == |
| | + | |
| | + | Which ones? [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 16:56, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | :Market failure, government, taxes, etc.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:12, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | :::Those aren't principals or theories, those are THINGS THAT EXIST IN REALITY. Theories would be IDEAS about those objective phenomena. What are you, simple or something? 18:05, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | ::::I'll guess you'll have to name-call somewhere else now. Do yourself a favor and open your mind, and rethink the liberal ideology that caused you to resort to such a crass insult.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:13, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | == Coates v. Keynes. == |
| | + | |
| | + | [http://search.mit.edu/search?site=ocw&client=mit&getfields=*&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=http%3A%2F%2Focw.mit.edu%2FOcwWeb%2Fsearch%2Fgoogle-ocw.xsl&proxyreload=1&as_dt=i&oe=utf-8&departmentName=web&courseName=&q=Coase&btnG.x=0&btnG.y=0 Coase, 62 mentionw on the MIT Open Course website] Versus [http://search.mit.edu/search?site=ocw&client=mit&getfields=*&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=http%3A%2F%2Focw.mit.edu%2FOcwWeb%2Fsearch%2Fgoogle-ocw.xsl&proxyreload=1&as_dt=i&oe=utf-8&departmentName=web&courseName=&q=Keynes&btnG.x=0&btnG.y=0 Keynes 55 mentions on the MIT Open Course website]. [[User:AlexWD|AlexWD]] 18:18, 31 January 2010 (EST) |
| | + | |
| | + | :And "Keynesian" is mentioned another 46 times. Next look at ''how'' they are mentioned. To liberals, the failed economics of "Keynes" and "Keynesian", which ruined England, is worshiped and taught as thought it were somehow Gospel Truth.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:13, 31 January 2010 (EST) |