In the interests of helping people read her work, her home page is: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~eandersn/ http://www-personal.umich.edu/~eandersn/ A lot of

In the interests of helping people read her work, her home page is: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~eandersn/ http://www-personal.umich.edu/~eandersn/ A lot of her stuff is online - I just read one paper ("Ethical Assumptions in Economic Theory: Some Lessons from the History of Credit and Bankruptcy" - 2004) and was happy to find it easy to read and jargon-free. A couple of quotes: "Most critics of the normative framework of economic theory fault it for failing to recognize the vices of capitalism – for example, its inability to evaluate the inequality that capitalism generates. My thesis turns this critique on its head: the assumptions of economic theory fail to represent some of the virtues of capitalism. They fail to grasp some ways in which capitalism advanced freedom and equality." "The normative framework of the classical economists Smith and Condorcet, is superior to that of neoclassical economics and libertarians. The classical economists had superior conceptions of freedom and equality, which are better able to grasp the specific virtues of capitalism. ... Contemporary economic theory cannot represent these virtues because it is too abstract." The New Yorker article is was interesting, but journalistic summaries of peoples' ideas should help you decide whether you want to check out the original works. New Yorker articles aren't a substitute for the real thing. For instance, it's easy to think you're disagreeing with Elizabeth Anderson when you may actually be disagreeing with the guy who wrote the New Yorker article. So go read some of her work, and then disagree if you must.