Mainstream Economists: Ron Paul Is ‘Dangerous’

Bill Anderson
LRC Blog
November 10, 2011

To get a sense of just how intellectually and morally bankrupt mainstream academic economics has become, this article tells all, however unknowingly, since the author believes the quoted economists are correct:

Another professor who teaches at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Michael Salemi, was able to identify statements from six candidates that “would earn failing grades in my Econ 101 class.”

Salemi called Ron Paul’s rationale for returning to the gold standard “one of the most dangerous ideas put forward by a politician in recent years.” (emphasis mine)

• A d v e r t i s e m e n t

All in all, the economists quote the Keynesian line as though it were Absolute Truth. One professor, for example, actually believes that Obama’s “green energy” proposals are sound (although he admits they won’t make for a good “jobs program.”)

As one who has taught college economics for nearly 25 years, I can say that the mainstream approach is so preposterous and so skewed that it is unsalvageable. The college texts so revered in this article teach that competition is based upon homogeneity and any time there are similar but somewhat heterogeneous goods sold, that situation is a “market failure” that needs to be “corrected” by government. Furthermore, we are supposed to believe that there is no need for entrepreneurs, as government regulators are blessed with perfect information and always can arrive at “optimal solutions,” as long as they seek the help of academic economists.

And notice the absolute reverence these people have for the Federal Reserve System. Yeah, it is quite rich to see clueless academic economists accusing Ron Paul of being “dangerous” because he wants sound money.

This article was posted: Thursday, November 10, 2011 at 8:10 am

---

---

---

---