Over at Createquity, Ian David Moss is comments on his post "Economists Don't Care About Poor People" -- one is, apparently, from his boss, which shows a willingness to exchange ideas in marked contrast to the oh-so-careful-about-my-career theatreosphere.
From my extremely limited knowledge of economics (although in the interest of transparency, I should admit that one of my best friends on campus is an economist, and I do spend money fairly regularly, so I guess that makes me an expert), I would like to say that I agree with Ian's distrust of the neoclassical approach to economics, which might have been relevant in the society for which it was designed, a society in which sellers and buyers were more likely to know each other and emotional advertising was not a constant mind-addling drumbeat, but in our media-saturated global marketplace it seems decidedly out of touch.
However, what I would draw my reader's attention to is the level of discourse exhibited in this discussion, which is quite high, carefully argued, and deeply knowledgeable. By calling into question neoclassical economics, Ian is definitely taking on the status quo represented by the Chicago School of economics most closely identified with Nobel Prize winner Milton Friedman, and yet not a douchebag or asshat in sight.
Thanks for the object lesson, Ian, and good luck with your boss!