공무원 존나게 뽑아대더만 이꼴나노 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ
서민들 세금 뜯어서 공무원들 연금 주게 생김 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ
앞으로 공무원 아닌 애들은 평생 세금 노예충 될 예정이니 젊은 일게이들은 이민가라
[출처] 공무원 연금 부채 급증으로 국가부채 1700조 임박 ㄷㄷㄷㄷ
나경원
오늘 두 명의 후보자를 철회하거나 사퇴시켰다. 당연한 수순이라고 생각한다. 이 자리에 계신 박대출 의원께서 ‘非코드 희생’이라고 말씀하셨는데 ‘非코드’ 후보 두 명 철회시킨 것으로 대충 넘어갈 수 없다. 코드 장관 두 명을 사실상 지키기 위한 ‘非코드 희생 플레이’ 아닌가 생각한다. 저희는 ‘위선영선’과 ‘막말연철’의 지명 철회를 요구한다. 또한 이 모든 인사의 책임이 있는 조국 수석의 사퇴를 요구한다. 조국 수석은 김의겸 대변인 투기도 막지 못한 책임도 또한 같이 있다는 말씀을 드린다. 그리고 최종적으로는 대통령의 사과를 요구한다.
----------------------------------
김문수
박영선 4선 국회의원 집이 3채인데, 구로을 지역구에는 한 채도 없네요. 지역구에는 오피스텔을 빌려놨는데, 살기는 연희동 전두환 대통령집 두 집 건너 산답니다. 보통 국회의원들은 지역구에 한 채부터 가지고, 두 채라면 국회 근처에 가지지요. 구로사랑, 서민 행세하더니
이게 뭡니까?
마치 항일독립투사처럼 열 올리더니, 일본 동경 아카사카에 집까지 가지고 있네요? 하나밖에 없는 아들은 외국인 초등학교, 일본 중학교, 미국 고등학교, 미국 대학교에 다니며, 2중 국적이랍니다. 반일 반미의 최선봉인 양 선동하더니, 이게 뭡니까? 문재인 대통령 입만 열면 75년 지난 옛날 친일파 탓하더니, 당신 곁에 더 가까이 두고 싶어하는 박영선은 바로 지금 골수 친일파 아닙니까?
-----------------------------------------------------------
鄭 국방이 질타한 軍紀解弛는 文 대통령의 '경험하지 않은 나라'로 가는
過程은 아닌가?
이동복
정경두(鄭景斗) 국방부장관이 1일 전군(全軍)의 주요 지휘관과 화상회의를 하면서 “군의관이 지문을 본떠 출퇴근을 조작하고, 정비 실수에 의해 천궁 미사일이 발사되는가 하면, 카투사들이 허위보고 후 장기간 무단이탈하고, 무분별하게 인터넷 도박에 빠진 군인들까지 있다”면서 “국민의 기대에 어긋나는 상상하지 못할 일들이 발생하고 있다”는 극언(極言)으로 군내(軍內)에 만연(蔓延)하고 있는 군기해이(軍紀解弛)를 질타했다고 한다.
일견(一見), 정 국방의 질타는 이 나라 국방 책임자의 입장에서 당연한 이야기를 하는 것처럼 들릴 수 있어 보인다. 그러나, 곰씹어 보면, 정 국방의 질타 내용은 이 나라가 문재인(文在寅) 대통령이 다짐한 '누구도 경험하지 않았던 나라'로 진행하고 있음을, 국방부 영역에서, 드러내 주는 것이 아닌가 싶기도 하다. 이 같은 의견에 대한 정 국방의 생각은 어떠한지, 가능하다면, 이 글에 대한 댓글로라도 알려 줄 수 없는지 모르겠다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
석유제품을 북한에 몰래 넘긴 혐의로 한국 유류선 한 척이 부산에 억류된 것이 확인됐습니다.
북한은 연간 200만 배럴의 석유제품을 수입했었는데, 지금은 50만 배럴 까지만 허용됩니다.
유엔의 제재 때문입니다.
김정은은 공언했던 것과 달리 비핵화 의지가 있는지 의심받고 있습니다.
미국은 남북 경협이 아니라 강력한 제재 이행을 통해 비핵화를 이끌겠다는 구상이지요.
이런 시점에 한국 기업이 불법을 도운 혐의로 조사받고 있습니다.
북한은 연간 200만 배럴의 석유제품을 수입했었는데, 지금은 50만 배럴 까지만 허용됩니다.
유엔의 제재 때문입니다.
김정은은 공언했던 것과 달리 비핵화 의지가 있는지 의심받고 있습니다.
미국은 남북 경협이 아니라 강력한 제재 이행을 통해 비핵화를 이끌겠다는 구상이지요.
이런 시점에 한국 기업이 불법을 도운 혐의로 조사받고 있습니다.
[출처] 불법 환적’ 한국선박 첫 적발…부산항 억류/ 채널 에이
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“文 정부가 '反김정은' 명단 北에 유출… CIA 의심”
日 온라인매체 보도 “미북회담 때 평양서 '간첩색출' 작전… 美, 기밀 유출자로 한국 의심”
---> 미국 정보부가 북한의 가짜 쿠데타 명단을 흘렸는데, 이
게 북한으로 들어가서, 지난 김정은의 하노이 방문 당시 명단
의 북한 군인들이 체포되었다는 것이다.
미국은 한국 정부가
이 명단을 북한에 유출했다고 믿고 있다.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---> 미국 정보부가 북한의 가짜 쿠데타 명단을 흘렸는데, 이
三、越南何时废除汉字虽然在唐宋时期，有人根据越南语的特点，参照汉字字形，创造了字喃，但是始终没有普及开。虽然字喃是借用整个汉字或是汉字偏旁，然后采取汉字中的会意、形声、假借等造字方法创制而成，本质上是对汉字的补充。甚至可以认为汉字和字喃其实只是一种字，因为字的构造成分完全相同。但是由于越南人深受儒家文化和汉字的影响，非常排斥和拒绝使用字喃。无论是官方还是民间，汉字依旧都是正式的越南书面文字。这种情况直到1858年法军炮轰岘港，打开了越南的国门，将整个越南变为其殖民地。
越南废除汉字最重要的原因是，法国殖民者为割裂中越的历史文化纽带，19世纪下半叶以来，法国殖民者开始了一系列的去中国化运动，禁止当时的阮朝使用官方文书汉文（文言文），并废除了1915年以及1918年至1919年的科举考试。汉字、汉文地位的降低，也导致了与汉字关系紧密的喃字的地位下降。在20世纪上半叶，喃字和汉喃文逐渐没落，而法国殖民者推行的拼音化文字国语字和国语字文开始标准化并在越南通行。早在公元17世纪之时，旅居越南的西方传教士就开始用拉丁字母拼写越南语，今天越南的国语字就是在此基础上发展而来的。
此外，还有一个重要原因是，随着越南近代国内独立运动和民族主义的兴起，虽然越南的国语字本身有很大缺陷，但由于殖民时代的强行推广，加之相对易学易懂，因此成为了越南革命者们传播先进思想、争取民族独立的工具。特别是1945年9月2日，当时的越南领导人胡志明在河内巴亭广场宣读了用国语字撰写的《独立宣言》，越南民主共和国正式成立，国语字正式成为了越南的官方正式文字。
作者：慕容齊
链接：https://www.jianshu.com/p/caa87a36381a
来源：简书
简书著作权归作者所有，任何形式的转载都请联系作者获得授权并注明出处。
---->우연히 읽게 되었는데, 그동안 월남의 한자 폐지가 근대화의 일환이거나 공산주의자들의 소행인줄 알았는데, 사실은 프랑스 식민지 시대에 시작된 일이라고 한다. 그리고 그 근원은 이미 17세기에 선교사들이 라틴어로 월남어를 표기한 데서 비롯한다고 한다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“비핵화 ‘큰 조치’는 모든 핵시설 공개와 해체 시작”
[VOA] 정치·안보 박승혁 2019.4.2
미국의 핵 전문가들은 마이크 폼페오 국무장관이 북한으로부터 기대한다는 ‘큰 조치’를 ‘모든 핵시설 공개와 해체’로 분석했습니다. 실제 비핵화 수순이 아니면 미국이 받아들이지 않을 것으로 전망했습니다.
마이크 폼페오 미 국무장관은 지난달 27일 하원 외교위원회 청문회에 출석해, 하노이 회담이 결렬된 이유는 “북한의 큰 조치”를 보지 못했기 때문이라고 말했습니다.
[녹취: 마이크 폼페오 미국 국무장관] "We have not yet seen them make the big move that we were hoping frankly they would do in Hanoi."
북한이 하노이 회담에서 미국의 솔직한 바람대로 큰 결단을 내리지 않았다는 것입니다.
올리 하이노넨 전 국제원자력기구 사무차장은 폼페오 장관이 얘기한 ‘큰 조치’란 북한 내부에 있는 모든 핵시설을 공개한 뒤 관련 활동을 멈추고 해체 수순을 밟으라는 뜻일 것이라고 관측했습니다.
[녹취: 올리 하이노넨 전 국제원자력기구 사무차장] "They were probably expecting kind of overall plan of procedures in steps. If you shut down all the facilities and you tell where they are, and you start real dismantlement, then they’d know you are serious about it."
하이노넨 전 사무차장은 미국 입장에선 북한이 하노이에서 비핵화 과정의 전반적 절차를 밝히기를 기대했을 것이라고 말했습니다.
그러면서 북한이 모든 시설을 폐쇄하고, 위치를 밝히고, 실제로 폐기 작업을 시작했다면 미국이 만족할 만큼 비핵화 의지가 확실히 드러났을 것이라고 설명했습니다.
이에 더해 숨겨진 모든 시설에 대한 신고와, 생산 중단 등이 뒤따라야 한다고 말했습니다.
[출처] [외신] 미, 비핵화 큰 조치는 모든 핵시설 공개 후 해체 북한 사기경력있기 때문
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
시진핑의 국가 주도 경제를 협정으로 바꿀 수 있을까? 그렇게 믿는다면 매우 어리석은 일이다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
시진핑의 2013년 비밀 연설에 따르면, 자본주의는 필연적으로 붕괴한다고 한다.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
괴물 시진핑의 질주를 멈추어야 한다.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
장자연 목격자? ㅈㄹ염병을하노ㅋㅋㅋ북한 예술단에서 시다바리나할것같은 주름살 다쳐진년이 ㅋㅋ
애당초 몇년이 지난후에 이제와서 목격자?
그럼 진작에 법적절차딛고 그당시에 목격자라는사실 입증시켰어야지
지금 버닝썬 사건 터지고나서 국민들이 장자연팔이해 재조명되니까
아무리봐도 이때다싶어서 듣보잡배우가 가십거리물어 주목좀 받아볼려고 발광하는거밖에 더되보이냐 븅신같은년 ㅋㅋ
ㅋㅋ아니 청와대 청원이 제일 웃김
그리고 정치계인사들과 관련있다한들
장자연본인이 뜨고싶어서 지몸뚱아리판게 거의 의심시되고있는데
고인팔이하면서 이렇게까지 노이즈마케팅을 하네 ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ
[출처] 윤지오 이런년들 절대 믿으면 안된다 ㅋㅋ (운영자는 비켜라)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
일본 연호 레이와의 의미
EDIT 1: The name "Reiwa" was originally from Manyoshu, which is the oldest anthology (existing collection) of Japanese poetry. "Reiwa" is the first Japanese era name to be used from not Chinese - but Japanese - literature.
EDIT 2: "Reiwa" came specifically from Manyoshu poem 815, fom volume 5:
- The word 令月 (reigetsu; 令 is the first kanji of the "Reiwa" era name) can be "a fine/felicitous month" or the second month of the old calendar.
- The 和 (second kanji) comes from "yawaragu," the growing mildness of the early spring winds.
As Prime Minister Abe explains: The poem describes softer winds following the bitter cold of winter, coaxing the ume (plum/apricot) blossoms out. Hopes are that this new era will be "one where the Japanese people can bloom following a period of coldness for them."
레이와는 "초봄의 따사로움" 정도의 의미인 듯하다. 만엽집의 시는 추운 겨울이 지난 뒤에 불어노는 훈풍을 그리고 있다고 한다. 봄바람에 꽃이 피듯이 일본에 화기가 돌기는 바라는 연호이다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1965년과 현재, 에너지원의 순서는 동일하다
1. 석유
2. 석탄
3, 천연가스
4. 수력발전
5. 원자력
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That $15-$19 minimum wage is why the croissants are expensive!
미국 의원인 오카시오-코르테스가, 라구아디아 공황에서 크루아상 하나가 7달러 하니까, 시급 15 달러는 받아야 하는 게 아니냐고 트윗을 날렸다. 그러자 이에 대한 찬반 댓글이 무척 많이 달렸다. 위의 댓글은 그중의 하나.
크루아상이 7 달러나 하는 것은, 최저 임금이 15달러에서 19 달러로 높기 때문이다.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
투자 오류는 왜 일어나는가?
케인즈 식의 생각에 따르면, 실업자의 기술이나 선호나 장소와 상관 없이, 전체 수요를 증가하기만 하면, 그리고 그 돈을 사람들이 화장품을 사거나 컴퓨터를 사거나 상관 없이, 그 실업자가 취업에 성공한다는 것이다.
정부의 부양 정책으로 자원이 이동하면, 생산적이고 사적인 부문의 자원은 그만큼 줄어들게 된다.
정부의 지출은 자원의 재분배를 왜곡하고 또 인플레를 유발할 가능성이 크다.
Malinvestment: Have We Learned Anything Since the Last Recession?
Bradley Thomas
A growing number of economists are predicting the current economic boom will turn to bust in 2019. When recession does come, will economists simply call for more of the same — namely endless government spending?
After all, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, most economists told us the problem was the private sector was not spending and investing enough. So, we were told, government must step in and make up the difference with deficit spending to get “idle resources” — like capital goods and labor — back to work.
But what should the government be spending on? Apparently, anything.
This is not an exaggeration. For example, noted Cal-Berkeley economist Brad DeLong insisted in 2009 “At this point, anything that boosts the government’s deficit over the next two years passes the benefit-cost test — anything at all.”
Such thinking reveals one of fatal flaws of mainstream economics: the idea that all the economy is one big homogeneous blob. As Friedrich Hayek put it, “Mr. Keynes’ aggregates conceal the most fundamental mechanisms of change.”
The Problem of Malinvestment
During the 2002-2007 housing boom, significant amounts of capital and labor were organized in very specific locations, combinations and uses at multiple stages of production to produce more houses to satisfy consumer demands. This meant more construction workers employed building homes in growing communities, and more mortgage brokers and investment bankers to finance the boom. It also meant more inputs such as wood, nails, concrete and glass directed toward homebuilding; which in turn required more lumber processing, steel production, and so on.
When the housing bubble burst, millions of these workers became unemployed, and significant portions of the structures of production that were expanded to support the bubble became idle as well. The bursting of the bubble then sent a ripple effect permeating through other sectors of the economy, creating yet more unemployed resources.
For the economy to recover, a major reallocation of these idle workers and resources needed to occur. Idle workers and capital goods needed to be reshuffled to those entrepreneurs ready and willing to employ them in an attempt to meet changing consumer demands.
But this process is not short nor easy. The unemployed workers have specific skills and experience, and many may need training to acquire new skills to meet the changing labor market. Some may be unwilling to move to take new opportunities. How is a laid off bricklayer supposed to find work in a market demanding graphic designers and coders?
The capital goods no longer being utilized likewise have specific uses, and often need specific complementary goods to fulfill their role in the production process. Some of them may end up being liquidated because no entrepreneurs have a need for them. There simply may be too many bulldozers and cement mixers needed given the now smaller, post-bubble construction industry.
Recession: A Process of Re-allocating Malinvested Resources
This process of reshuffling explains the strength and duration of the recession.
Keynesian-inspired economists and politicians, unfortunately, view the idle capital and labor only in the aggregate. Their grand “stimulus” plans involve nothing more nuanced than coaxing consumer spending and business investment into spending more money on anything, anytime, anywhere.
As economic historian Robert Higgs described , “If someone, whatever his skills, preferences, or location, is unemployed, then, in this framework of thought, we may expect to put him back to work by increasing aggregate demand, regardless of what we happen to spend the money for, whether it be cosmetics or computers.”
Simply force-feeding new money into the economy will be ineffective because it takes no account of the true reason why the resources are idle in the first place.
The billions of dollars worth of public works projects, for instance, will mostly draw from labor and capital actively engaged in the private sector and fail to employ idle resources. Say, for instance, Chicago receives millions to build a new road. Can anyone honestly say for certain that the road construction will only employ workers and other inputs sitting idle in the Chicago area due to the housing bust?
Unemployed bankers and carpenters won’t be of much help laying pavement. Rather, the road project will undoubtedly divert labor and machinery actively engaged in private sector projects in the region. In the end, fewer resources will be available for productive, private sector use because they are tied up in government stimulus projects.
Meanwhile, the majority of idle workers and equipment will continue to sit idle.
Moreover, billions of available funds in the capital investment markets will be tied up by government projects; further drying up private investment opportunities.
Government stimulus spending may also artificially inflate the prices of resources, pricing them out of reach for entrepreneurs needing low-priced inputs to attract their investment during uncertain recessionary conditions. The very resources needed to generate recovery will be unavailable, having been diverted to government projects.
The best policy is for government to get out of the way and allow the reallocation of resources to occur unhampered. Government spending can only distort and prolong this process, most likely producing harmful inflationary pressure on prices along the way.
Will next time be any different?
Bradley Thomas is creator of the website Erasethestate.com, and is a libertarian activist and writer with nearly 15 years experience researching and writing on political philosophy and economics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
소명으로서의 경제학
오스트리아 학파의 학자들, 멩거, 봄바베르크, 비저 등은 경제학을 추구함에 있어 그것을 금전적 이익을 얻는 직업이 아니라, 진실을 발견하기 위한 소명으로 임했다.
이에 반해 직업적인 경제학자들은 생활을 유지하고 명성을 얻고, 정책을 결정하는 등의 목적으로 경제학을 배운다.
미제스는 일찍이 “경제학자라는 직업의 발전은 개입주의 정책의 부산물로 나타났다”라고 갈파한 바 있다.
Economics as a Vocation
Joseph T. Salerno
The Free Market 26, no. 1 (January 2005)
Should economics be pursued as a profession or a vocation? The choice isn’t about the job title of a particular economist or what tasks he or she fulfills in the course of a day’s work. It is about the motivation behind the work and the subjective orientation one brings to the task. The choice tends to dictate whether an economist will serve the cause of truth and freedom, or waste his or her talents on convenience, ephemera, and statism.
Think about the word "vocation" as a work or function to which a person is called that requires dedication to an idea. A vocation involves what Ludwig von Mises called "introversive" labor while a profession involves "extroversive" labor. The essence of introversive labor is work undertaken solely for its own sake and not as a means to a more remote end. Extroversive labor, in contrast, is performed because the individual "prefers the proceeds he can earn by working to the disutility of labor and the pleasure of leisure."
One of the "two most conspicuous examples" of introversive labor, according to Mises, is "the search for truth and knowledge pursued for its own sake and not as a means of improving one’s own efficiency and skill in the performance of other kinds of labor aiming at other ends." The second is "genuine sport, practiced without any design for reward and social success."
It is not that the effort expended by the "truth seeker" or "mountain climber" does not involve the disutility of labor, rather "it is precisely overcoming the disutility of labor that satisfies him." Thus genuine truth seeking in any scientific discipline qualifies economically as "consumption" and its pursuit as a vocation.
The founding members of the Austrian School pursued economic research neither for pecuniary gain nor because they sought professional recognition or an influence on public policy. According to Mises, "When Menger, Böhm-Bawerk and Wieser began their scientific careers . . . [t]hey considered it as their vocation to put economic theory on a sound basis and they dedicated themselves entirely to this cause." These three eminent Austrians, therefore, were not economists by profession but by vocation.
The "vocational" economist takes a position in academia or works in some other profession such as banking, journalism, industry, or government in order to obtain the concrete means necessary to sustain and complement his efforts to discover new truths or expound and apply established truths in his economic research and writing.
Now consider the contrast with the "professional" economist. He or she aims at earning a livelihood, eliciting acclaim from peers, achieving public fame, shaping political policies or, most likely, a combination of these ends.
Thus the difference between the vocational economist and the professional economist is not their objective method of earning a living but the subjective ends aimed at, which are unobservable. Nonetheless, despite the subjective element involved, the two kinds of economists can be readily distinguished from each other by scrutinizing the disparate views they express toward economic research, particularly its truth content and perceived rewards.
Vocational economists like Murray Rothbard are not allergic to using the unfashionable terms "truth" and "law" when characterizing the science of economics. For Rothbard economics is a substantive body of immutable and universal causal laws that are logically deduced from the incontrovertible fact that people employ means to attain their most desired ends. As such, Rothbard held that "all these elaborated laws [of economics] are absolutely true" and that "economics does furnish . . . existential laws."
Furthermore, in the 1950s and 1960s, Rothbard was working on Austrian economics in obscurity and virtual isolation. He did not obtain a full-time academic position until 1966 and, before then, was earning a precarious living on foundation grants while he soldiered on in building up the Austrian theoretical edifice. Yet Rothbard revealed in an interview in 1990 that he had been quite content during this period: "Any chance to write a book or meet new people was terrific."
These are the views and the attitudes of the ideal vocational economist.
The Problem of the Professional
Paul Samuelson is the exemplar of the modern professional economist. When Samuelson once grandiosely declared, "I can claim in talking about modern economics I am talking about me," he spoke truer than he knew. In his approach to economic research Samuelson is a self-proclaimed follower of the "views of Ernst Mach and the crude logical positivists."
Samuelson’s formulation of the now discredited stable Philip’s Curve tradeoff between inflation and unemployment is an example of such Machian theorizing in action. Without doubt, the Philips Curve for a time was well liked by Samuelson, but its truth content in the face of the stagflation that developed in the 1970s was exactly nil.
Ultimately, however, the professional economist need not fret overly much about whether he can harvest a grain of truth from such unrealistic models, because his reward for pursuing economic research lies elsewhere. According to Samuelson, "In the long run the economic scholar works for the only coin worth having—our own applause."
Samuelson’s account of the extroversive reward sought after by modern professional economists clearly—though perhaps unwittingly—reveals that their research endeavors are not governed primarily by a search for truth.
Why We Must Choose
The professionalization of a scientific discipline, particularly a social science like economics, almost always proceeds hand in hand with the expansion of government interventionism.
As Mises put it "The development of a profession of economists is an offshoot of interventionism." The reason for this inevitable connection rests on two facts. On the one hand, the State requires a class of intellectuals and specialists for designing, implementing, and providing rationalizations for various interventions into the market economy. On the other hand, those intellectuals who seek the regular income and prestige that accompany the professionalization of their discipline are ever ready to oblige, because the ability of an intellectual to earn his living researching and writing in his chosen field on the free market is always precarious at best.
As the interventionist State expands, it reinforces the need for trained experts and the university system obtains increasing subsidies from government to initiate and expand graduate programs that will provide such personnel. The lucrative positions in these programs are naturally bestowed on those economists who spearhead the drive to professionalize and are, therefore, most active and outspoken in their support of government interventionism.
In the US, the most extreme and thoroughgoing instances of domestic interventionism occurred during the two World Wars of the twentieth century. It was therefore no surprise that the movement to professionalize American economics, which began in the 1880s, experienced quantum leaps during these war crises. For when the State goes to war it needs professional expertise to plan and direct the massive mobilization of the resources it requires. This translates into a cornucopia of lucrative and prestigious jobs for economic experts and specialists in the bureaus and advisory boards of the political planning apparatus that centrally directs the war economy.
The remarkable proliferation of hyper-specialized fields that occurred during and after World War II led to a disintegration of economic theory, signified by the disappearance of the general economic treatise. No longer was there an integrated system of general economic principles that was held in common and applied to the analysis of all policies and problems by those who called themselves economists. Now each sub-field of research had its own special theory which was more or less sealed off from general economic theory. Even general theory itself was now compartmentalized into microeconomics and macroeconomics.
To sum up: the vocational economist strives to master the system of economic theory as handed down by the great system builders and innovators of the past. Once this mastery is achieved, then, depending on his ability, he is poised either to expound and apply this theoretical system, to contribute a few important innovations, or to present a thoroughgoing reformulation that embodies a number of major advances.
There are very few individuals who are capable of successfully embarking on even the first of these paths. Moreover, regardless of which path is taken, the vocational economist is driven forward by a thirst for truth which is never slaked. He seeks to know ever more about what Rothbard termed "the structure of reality as embodied in economic law."
As Mises perceptively noted as early as 1949, professional economists "rival the legal profession in the supreme conduct of political affairs. The eminent role they play is one of the most characteristic features of our age of interventionism."
------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기