[lbo-talk] sketching an "anti-economist"

[Jeffrey Fisher]

On 8/19/07, Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 8/19/07, Michael Pollak <mpollak at panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 19 Aug 2007, Jeffrey Fisher wrote:
> >
> > > Right. Picking up from the other thread: what would an anti-Economist
> > > even look like?
> >
> > I've always described Doug's Left Business Observer as "the left
> > antidote
> > to the Economist" and stylistically and intellectually I still think it
> > is.  It has all the stylistic virtues people say they love the Economist
> > for: very concise and well written; very wry and sarcastic; brilliant
> > charts; sharply opinionated; and steeped in data.  Doug IMHO excels the
> > Economist in all those virtues -- he's more concise, better written,
> > funnier and has better charts.  And of course not least, his judgments
> > are
> > truer because his basic principles are better. Stylistically, the only
> > boon the Economist has that LBO is missing is their photo captions.
> >
> > Now if you want a more left substitute for the Economist as universal
> > news
> > magazine, frankly I think your huckleberry is the Financial Times.  It's
> > got
> > more news than the Economist, it's more left, and it's better written.
> > Read it
> > every day for one week (just the first section) and you'll never go
> > back.
>
>
> Thanks for the wake-up call. I can't argue with a word you said. I have
> gone through long phases where I cruised the FT web site during the week and
> then picked up the weekend edition on Saturday to spend some time with. I
> probably need another one of those phases. The main problem is the expense.
> An old roommate and I were on the verge of splitting a subscription a few
> years ago when he left town, and then I didn't really think I could justify
> it.
>
> Regarding LBO, which I agree is both enjoyable and a veritable arsenal for
> economic-political arguments, I won't argue with you but to say that it's
> neither weekly nor newsy. And LBO-Talk is great, but it lacks the charts.
> ;-)
>
> Maybe that's really the best we can recommend. I still like the WSJ, too,
> although I think in most respects I outlined (and as you note), FT is
> better. I would like to recommend the Guardian Weekly/LMD combo, but I let
> that sub lapse years ago, because it took so long to arrive that my "news"
> was already almost two weeks old.
>
> Of course, this is still not a weekly. But I'm thinking it's probably time
> for me to start picking up that Saturday FT, again, and maybe Monday to kick
> off the week.
>

BUT . . . wouldn't you *still* love a cool weekly like that?

j