3 ms·
> comprised publishers like the Economist I was under the impression that the economist was one of the last remaining high quality print magazines in existence
by cj 4y ago
> comprised publishers like the Economist
I was under the impression that the economist was one of the last remaining high quality print magazines in existence.
Curious what makes you think they’re compromised? (And if you’re aware of any similar publications that aren’t compromised?)
Edit: just noticed the quote says “comprised” rather than compromised. Disregard this comment if that wasn’t a typo
- nuc1e0n 4y agoThe Economist remains uncompromised in my view. Maybe out of touch though. Another reason for more vigourous debate. I still think all these troubles are just engineering problems to be solved. I relish the task.
- jjeaff 4y agoI think most honest economists would tell you that economists have never been very good at predicting the future. They can do a pretty good job of explaining the why of the past and how markets work, but there are too many factors, either known or unknown that always come into play. But people really want predictions, which is why you get headlines like this one.
- nuc1e0n 4y agoWell they are a company that needs to sell magazines/newspapers. Good for them I say. I think predictions can still be useful even if they are wrong.