[FabHK]

Thanks. It's good to challenge your views, so I'll listen in a bit. However, I must say that as an ex-libertarian (that left the creed because of its serious flaws) I am apprehensive about the neutrality of a show hosted by Tim Wood, a "Rothbardian anarcho-capitalist and paleolibertarian" (Wikipedia) that's received fellowships from the Institute for Humane Studies (funded by the Scaifes, Kochs, etc.).

EDIT to add:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Woods

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Humane_Studies

[CharlesColeman]

> I am apprehensive about the neutrality of a show...

I'd also assume any show that bills itself as "Paul Krugman's column refuted, week after week!" is more of an ideological security blanket than real intellectual engagement or critique.

[andymockli]

I'd personally categorize Paul Krugman as an idealogue. You might think the same of Bob Murphy and Tom Woods, but the aim was to offer a counterpoint to Krugman's ideas.

I believe you'd find the intellectual engagement and critiques within the podcast, not the subtitle.

[CharlesColeman]

> I believe you'd find the intellectual engagement and critiques within the podcast, not the subtitle.

No, I doubt it. If they think they can refute [1] like clockwork future columns they've never seen, it's almost certain they're just rehashing dogmas for the faithful. I have better things to spend my time on than that.

[1] a very strong word, by the way