"Markets Are More Knowledgeable Than Intellectuals"

Noted economist Donald Boudreaux answers an argument against free trade from a reader: 

You [Boudreaux] ignored the fact the market attaches no value to job stability and the natural human desire that many have not to have to move out of our community simply to get a decent job. You ignore the market not considering the effects of cheap imports on these meaningful variables.

A summary of Boudreaux's excellent answer:

Under a policy of free trade, the market does not ignore the value that workers place on job stability or on remaining in their communities. It simply requires people who want more of these “meaningful variables” to pay for them.

"On Biden, Betrayal, Burdens, and Bunk"

Economics is 100% sure of this. (How can you argue with science??)

The reality here is that the corporations that he says are going to send bigger checks to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) after the tax hike aren’t the ones who actually shoulder this heavier tax burden.

The best explanation I’ve seen on this comes from a 2004 quote by economist Stephen Entin, who wrote, “The economic burden of a tax frequently does not rest with the person or business who has the statutory liability for paying the tax to the government.” That’s because taxes are ultimately only paid by people.

"The social sciences are useless. So why do we study them? Here’s a good reason"

By Columbia prof. Andrew Gelman. He gives the same answer as that given by my friend and former colleague, Steve Margolis: we're here to play defense.

The baseball analyst Bill James once said that the alternative to good statistics is not no statistics, it’s bad statistics. Similarly, the alternative to good social science is not no social science, it’s bad social science.