Comments on: Only Mostly Dead

By: Emma

Emma — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:36:18 +0000

Did Gm deserve the bailout? You Ask me I would say NO.. why? When Honda and Toyota were out inventing new cars, GM was busy boasting about its pride and Showing off its hungry hungry Daughter the Hummer

By: Pete Eyre

Pete Eyre — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:37:04 +0000

Excellent overview! Surprised it only recently came across my radar. I just linked to it from a related thread on Bureaucrash Social:

http://social.bureaucrash.com/forum/topics/heritage-foundation-has-a-good

By: No longer supporting AEI « Creative Destruction

No longer supporting AEI « Creative Destruction — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 19:25:15 +0000

[...] via Only Mostly Dead « Jay P. Greene’s Blog. [...]

By: Are Think Tank Donors Getting What They Pay for? | Think Tank West

Are Think Tank Donors Getting What They Pay for? | Think Tank West — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:19:56 +0000

[...] scientist Jay Greene has an interesting blog post running down what the various free market and “free market” think tanks had to say in [...]

By: Where were the think tanks? Bailout Edition. — FR33 AGENTS

Where were the think tanks? Bailout Edition. — FR33 AGENTS — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:30:22 +0000

[...] a wonderfully self-serving blog post, Cato’s Andrew J. Coulson posted a link to Jay P. Greene’s analysis of how free-market think tanks have responded during “Bailout Mania 2008.” [...]

By: Bob Weber

Bob Weber — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 18:05:25 +0000

The real function of AEI and Heritage has been to push for war & intervention abroad, providing homes for even such neocons as Michael Ledeen (who is so nutty he couldn’t get a job in the Bush 43 administratration!) and promote a pro-business “soft socialism” at home. Nothing limited government about them.

By: Jay P. Greene

Jay P. Greene — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 01:35:50 +0000

Hey Patrick,

It’s important for think tanks to be willing to compromise in order to have influence to move policy in the direction of their principles. I worry about purist organizations that have no interest in influence or compromise. To me they are like monks staying inside their monastary and worshipping the true G-D without interest in the outside world. Effective think tanks have to wander out and sully themselves in the real world.

But their compromises should move us closer to principles, not further away. The problem with backing the bailout (in addition to it being unnecessary and ineffective) is that it moves us further away from the principles of limited government and market reliance.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:24:12 +0000

I’m also surprised that AEI was the most influential. I read their material far less than any other national think tank. I guess that just shows personal experience doesn’t necessarily reflect reality.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 23:11:58 +0000

I have stopped caring for Heritage since they came up with the Mass. healthcare plan. They’ve been “market oriented in name only” since then.

My viewing of the Von Misses Institute since September has increased by 1000%. I find them more credible than Heritage now.

I suspect Heritage has moved to telling Republicans what they want to hear not what they need to hear.

By: Jay P. Greene

Jay P. Greene — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 22:51:10 +0000

Well, not quite all, Brian, but I agree with your general point.

I suspect that the seduction of power and party politics may be greater the closer you are to the centers of power, like DC.

Also, there may be a tension between your two goals for think tanks. To promote innovative policies embodying principles you have to develop enough political sophistication and relevance to be influential. But that political influence may start as a means and become the end.