Twitter was David’s public platform and tools for practicing a new language – clear and understandable for everyone, it was a space where he made friends and enemies.

Only David's replies are saved in Twitter archive. Visit the external links to see the full discussions. If the tweet being replied to was deleted, it's gone.

Tweets 7,501 Replies 51,144 Retweets 24,559 Everything 83,204
Fri 9 Sep 2011 06:40

@Lib3rtarian – on which, perhaps the most entertaining (if a bit cruel) comment is: http://t.co/pyrhuvl

Fri 9 Sep 2011 06:26

@BastiatInst – yes, take note everyone, he’s now saying he isn’t rebutting my argument at all, just saying it doesn’t disprove Menger

Fri 9 Sep 2011 06:23

@CultureCultJeff – there’s an interesting school of deskilling theorists in France, too, but I can’t remember their names

Thu 8 Sep 2011 22:16

@jenwdragon – yes, I went downhill dramatically immediately thereafter. Or maybe they just had the best makeup person ever

Thu 8 Sep 2011 22:15

@dafowc @interfluidity @a_yakovlev – well I’ve long been an exponent of the 4 hour day.

Thu 8 Sep 2011 16:11

@NduguSumu – thanks. I seem to have even won some of them over. Others have circles in their brains.

Thu 8 Sep 2011 02:49

@jenwdragon – aw, that’s very sweet to say but I’ve been doing too much TV so I can tell I’m starting to look my age now

Wed 7 Sep 2011 23:03

@aniceberg – yes, they’re called “libraries” – no doubt another thing your apriori logic would not have predicted would exist

Wed 7 Sep 2011 20:59

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – your own lack of imagination or understanding is not itself an argument

Wed 7 Sep 2011 20:08

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – look, complex arguments can’t be conveyed on twitter. Read the reply! This is silly.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 20:07

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – ethnography, historical data, and logic all confirm barter only occurs between strangers. This has implications

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:36

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – actually I cover that, there are, but barter logically can’t really be one of them. Read the reply.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:35

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – this was theological, apparently Menger is for some at least one of the prophets who cannot be wrong

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:34

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – I made utterly accepted point that barter theory has proved wrong. Murphy attacked me because Menger embraced it

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:32

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – sorry, meant _you_ folks are the ones that tried to discredit my position. Others deserve to know on what basis.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:27

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – folks are the ones that chose to try to discredit my arguments. Others should know on what basis.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:21

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – if you don’t even know what an ad hominem is, yes, probably debate is pointless.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 19:19

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – characterizing someone’s arguments as theological is not an ad hominem.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:56

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – in other words you are theologians, you’re no longer pretending economics is anything like a science.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:51

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – you could make wonderful logical constructs based on the assumption civilization was created by space aliens. So?

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:49

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – problem is economists assume all market actors are essentially monomaniacal sociopaths. They call this “rationality”

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:44

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – in this case, both premises and logic seem to be faulty. You guys got it wrong. Deal with it.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:43

@aniceberg @jeremy6d – if you create a logical model that makes systematically false predictions, either your premises or logic are faulty.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:19

@jeremy6d – oh I know, even a lot of people on the site were admirably understanding and open-minded. Most of them, actually.

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:17

@jeremy6d @aniceberg – I’d have to end up sitting writing “no what I actually said was” over and over and over. Why should I have to?

Wed 7 Sep 2011 18:17

@jeremy6d @aniceberg – a waste of time I suspect. Man has some of the poorest reading skills I’ve encountered.