The Economist is a step up from The Daily Mail or The Washington Times. But that’s not a high bar. Despite the name, it has almost nothing to do with academic e

The Economist is a step up from The Daily Mail or The Washington Times. But that’s not a high bar. Despite the name, it has almost nothing to do with academic economics. Short Economist articles are not remotely comparable to literature reviews in top peer-reviewed journals. Such an absurd comparison demonstrates a lack of basic familiarity with either The Economist or Nature. This particular article consists of a few paragraphs of unsubstantiated dogmatic whining, centered on a facile, grossly misleading comparison of San Francisco to Cambridge MA. It cites zero economists. No reputable scholar would be willing to attach their name to such drivel. > That's literally a logical fallacy You don’t seem to understand the meaning of “literally” or “logical fallacy”.