[These will be replaced by much longer comments
in the final version]
What things are wrong with this
Portrait of an Economist
Imitations of Horace
An Imperial Rescript:
Kipling offers one reason why the Kaiser’s plan won’t work. Are
there others that would be more likely to occur to a modern
economist? If so, any guess as to why Kipling doesn’t mention them?
The Baldness of Chewed Ear:
Consider the risks of betting on an
event that both parties to the bet both can influence. You might
also view the final outcome as a case of insider trading.
A !Tangled Web: The behavior, including the
approach to trade, of the aliens seems very odd. Is it consistent
with economics? Would it work?
Frosk: A nice illustration of the principle of
And Then There Were None:
Would the Gand monetary system, based on obs, work? If not,
why--what problems would it encounter?
The Broken Window Fallacy:
The latest version of the argument that all four of these deal with
is that all human jobs will be taken over by robots, producing a
dystopia of mass unemployment.
The Petition of the Candlemakers
The Man who Asked Embarrassing Questions:
Bastiat was writing in the mid-19th century, before the marginal
revolution in economics. Can you translate his arguments into modern
terminology? Do they still hold?
Business as Usual During Alterations
War and Peace
The Peace of Dives: Written in 1903. Do events
since then provide evidence for or against the argument of the poem?
Arithmetic on the Frontier:
Adam Smith offered a similar
analysis in the context of classical antiquity but argued
that under modern circumstances the economics of warfare favored the
more civilized over the less. Do modern wars provide evidence for
either his position or Kipling's?