"Robert Sturgeon" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 06:24:42 GMT, Jonathan Ball
wrote:

[snip]

Robert:

Despite your articulate, well-reasoned and factually supported posts,
you should recognize by now that our little Jonny is never wrong about
anything; he knows it all already and is, therefore, totally immune from
further learning or the persuasive powers of fact and reason.
Furthermore, his reflexive resort to childish name-calling is evidence
of his inability to engage in constructive or meaningful debate or
discussion. Isn't it obvious that he has a well-earned place in your
twit filter?

Jeff

Time for a candid admission, bobby: you simply don't
know what you're talking about on the issue. You know
NEITHER economics nor psychology; you were just running
your ignorant mouth.

Casting aspersions on another really doesn't win you any
debating points. Instead, you might consider explaining why
economists study consumer confidence, market sentiment, the
irrational exuberance that powers bubble markets, that sort
of thing - psychological aspects of economics that you
assure us economists don't care one whit about.

I do thank you for your rudeness, because it has prompted me
to do some more research into this matter. I did an Alta
Vista search using the key words: economics and psychology.
It returned 588,142 results. As might be expected from
reading your tirades, it is easy to find articles on the
differences between the two. But it is also easy to find
articles to the contrary. Heres one:

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/5-30-2002-19412.asp
[snip]