[DeusEx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superpredator /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've always considered The Economist to be the Bose of newsweeklies, but I'd still read it before Newsweek and way before Time. I like The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and sometimes The Nation.

What does that make the others, then?

 

[invisiman]

I used to get Time for a quite a few years, and it has gone down hill steeply in the past two or three. Over time they had started devoting more and more pages to pop culture stuff, movies, music, celebrity gossip, and while some of that stuff was amusing, it made it very hard for me to take the rest of the magazine seriously. Ultimately it degenerated to the point where I was picking up the magazine just to have a laugh at those portions before tossing it aside.

 

[VicAjax]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeusEx /img/forum/go_quote.gif What does that make the others, then?

Skullcandy?

 

[VicAjax]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antony6555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif What's the difference? I'm not asking to be obtuse, I just looked up the definition of classical liberalism and it seems pretty much the same, ie limited governmental role with lots of individual freedom.

i think in the past 2 years or so, the term "libertarian" has been somewhat co-opted by disillusioned American conservatives (because "conservative" certainly doesn't mean what it used to).

libertarians fundamentally support free trade, open immigration, limited social prohibitions and empiricism. all of these precepts are anathema to many folks wearing the badge of libertarianism these days. Ron Paul, for instance, who really is not a libertarian.

 

[AmanGeorge]

Yeah, the Economist is more "little l" libertarian than "Big L" Libertarian, if you will

 

[VicAjax]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmanGeorge /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yeah, the Economist is more "little l" libertarian than "Big L" Libertarian, if you will

and this speaks to the point that, like all ideologies, there is a sliding scale of libertarianism. it's not a light switch.

 

[anetode]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmanGeorge /img/forum/go_quote.gif its brevity is a boon if you're someone looking to quickly understand the key facts and spectrum of opinion related to a given issue without doing a bunch of research yourself.

I have to agree with this point, the Economist is concise and useful. That is assuming you've developed a filter to account for its bias.

 

[Antony6555]

I'd like to see something like the Economist without the polemics. All content, baby.

 

[grawk]

Reason

 

[Antony6555]

Quote:

Originally Posted by grawk /img/forum/go_quote.gif Reason

I'm just...confused

 

[gilency]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils /img/forum/go_quote.gif fox news is the only reliable news source these days [size=xx-small]*cough cough*[/size]

LOL. I am not sure there are many magazines with the broad depth of knowledge and analysis the Economist provides.
It does provide an Anglo-Saxon view of economics and politics that I truly enjoy and describes nicely the root of problems and potential fixes. The dry humor only adds to its charm.
I also subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, which provides important bits of information.
The bottom line for me is that you need a wide range of views from different sources in order to give you a good perspective, IMO the Economist being an important source.
Their Charlemagne section on the Euro zone is always quite informative.
If you listen to podcasts, they have a short podcast I listen to when I exercise. BusinessWeek and NPR Planet Money and Is all politics podcasts are also pretty good, as is Scientific American's.

 

[VicAjax]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif LOL. I am not sure there are many magazines with the broad depth of knowledge and analysis the Economist provides. It does provide an Anglo-Saxon view of economics and politics that I truly enjoy and describes nicely the root of problems and potential fixes. The dry humor only adds to its charm. I also subscribe to the Wall Street Journal, which provides important bits of information. The bottom line for me is that you need a wide range of views from different sources in order to give you a good perspective, IMO the Economist being an important source. Their Charlemagne section on the Euro zone is always quite informative. If you listen to podcasts, they have a short podcast I listen to when I exercise. BusinessWeek and NPR Planet Money and Is all politics podcasts are also pretty good, as is Scientific American's.

only thing i disagree with is WSJ, which has gone way downhill in the past year.

 

[gilency]

Quote:

Originally Posted by VicAjax /img/forum/go_quote.gif only thing i disagree with is WSJ, which has gone way downhill in the past year.

Well, nothing lasts for ever. Their editorials (and Forbes, which I also subscribe to) tend to be very conservative in nature, and although I don't always agrees with their views (kind of like 70-30), is a good idea to hear opinions from both sides in order to formulate your own, not just one.....

 

[marvin]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilency /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, nothing lasts for ever. Their editorials (and Forbes, which I also subscribe to) tend to be very conservative in nature, and although I don't always agrees with their views (kind of like 70-30), is a good idea to hear opinions from both sides in order to formulate your own, not just one.....

The WSJ's Opinion and Commentary page has always been political class conservative though. The decline has to do with the changes to the paper since Murdoch's acquistion of the WSJ in 2007. Main issue as I see it is that the ongoing transformation of the WSJ into a conservative mirror of the NYT has steadily been erasing the business focus that made it noteworthy in the first place.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antony6555 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm just...confused

Reason is a Libertarian (cause, not party) magazine.

 

[robm321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvin /img/forum/go_quote.gif Economist regardless of political persuasion. It's much meatier than the other two.

Agreed