EconomistMom.com
…because I’m an economist and a mom–that’s why!

EconomistMom.com

I Think I’ve “Arrived” (in the EconoBlogosphere at least)

July 16th, 2009 . by economistmom

wsj-econ-blogs-picture

I’m so thrilled and honored that the Wall Street Journal featured my blog as a “Top 25″ economics blog.  (And the graphic above, with mine on top(!), is what shows up when you visit the Real Time Economics WSJ blog today.)  My readership is way lower than the other blogs cited, but a big “thank you” to my small but devoted (and often highly-influential) following, which obviously includes some reporters at the WSJ.

Back to fiscal policy issues later today…I think I’m enjoying a little basking for now.  ;)

5 Responses to “I Think I’ve “Arrived” (in the EconoBlogosphere at least)”

  1. comment number 1 by: Androcass

    Congratulations! As an “early adopter,” I’ve certainly seen the value of your blog, the willingness to understand that, whatever the immediate needs of our economy, we have to continue looking farther down the road and beware going off the other side of the road.

    Obviously, I and my little blog are not even a bit influential, but I will choose to believe that my faithful readership is part of the collective weight that has propelled EconomistMom into the limelight (excuse the tortured metaphor). So bask away.

  2. comment number 2 by: Formerbanker

    Congratulations on your well deserved recognition. I stumbled upon your site several months ago as I was considering writing my own econ/banking blog at the time (I was wondering if one named ‘economist mom’ already existed because it suits me too). I enjoy your posts tremendously. Good for you!

  3. comment number 3 by: Brooks

    Congrats!

    One important note: the list is alphabetical. Before that possibility occurred to me, I thought it was a quality rating of some sort (and usually numbered lists are numbered for a reason, so it’s puzzling why they’d number an alphabetical list, giving at least some of us the impression that the number represented some composite of the three dimensions they do rate (and perhaps others). So when I saw the huge-on-hyperpartisanship (and censorship), tiny-on-intelligent-analysis Angry Bear as #1 I thought the raters must not have a clue about much. Fortunately it occurred to me that it might be alphabetical, which turns out to be the case. I used to participate as a commenter on Angry Bear. It is a joke, not because it is hyperpartisan, but because the “analysis” of the contributors (e.g., the perpetually, fundamentally, obliviously conceptually confused Bruce Webb) ranges from weak to obviously erroneous. By contrast, Beat the Press, Economist’s View, and Brad DeLong’s site are also basically partisan propaganda blogs, and sometimes contain specious arguments, but for the most part are at least intelligent. Angry Bear is pretty much the equivalent — on the opposite end of the partisan divide — of what we’d have if an economics blog were started by a few economists and armchair economists from Redstate.com (the right’s blogging home of ignorance, stupidity, gross distortions and mischaracterizations, and intolerance for rational discussion/debate that challenges core partisan talking points).

    As with a news & opinion diet in general, in which I recommend seeking a balance of right, left, center and non-partisan/non-ideological, I’m glad there are intelligent blogs that reflect different schools of economic thought, even if they may sometimes reflect some ideological/partisan bias or spin, but I am really glad there are those precious few blogs, most notably EconomistMom, that really seem to strip out any personal ideological or partisan bias and approach issues and developments much more objectively than partisan/ideological blogs.

    As I always say, as with other public policy decisions for which we need guidance from experts, our choices (preferred policies) among economic policy options are a function of two elements: (1) what sets of trade-offs are associated with each alternative, and (2) which trade-offs we prefer. For the former, we rely (or should rely) heavily on economists, and the latter is based on our personal values, morals, and priorities. We depend on economists to help us with the former — to identify, quantify, etc., the trade-offs — so that we can move on to the latter using the most valid information possible about what the choices really are in terms of likely consequences (trade-offs). All too often, hyperpartisan economists of left and right skew their representations of what the trade-offs are (either deliberately or due to insufficient vigilance against their own bias), which is a shame. If all we had were biased/spinning economists of right and left, we could try to sort out what the most likely “truth” was, but it is very helpful to have straight-shooters like EconomistMom cutting through the bull.

    As a note, after the Obama victory last year, I was wondering if EconomistMom would be tough on Obama, since (if I recall correctly) she supported him personally in the election. I’m very pleased to see that she hasn’t shied away in the slightest from holding the Obama Administration to account nor from criticism generally where it is due. Kudos.

  4. comment number 4 by: NewReader

    I actually just came to this blog because of the list from the WSJ because I was looking for a blog that was even handed and made dispassionate analysis on substantive issues.

    So far I’m impressed and hope you maintain this refreshing independence!

  5. comment number 5 by: Josh Uy

    very cool