The weekly news journal, Britain's Economist generally has tons of factual detail and excellent, quality writing. Oftentimes they provide information and analysis on current events that is essential for understanding the world around us. BUT, their overall world view is nonsense. They subscribe to a deluded liberal economic philosophy as filtered through the prejudices and fantasies of the financial sector.
That's why I found this week's cover so hilarious. I'm not posting an image of it because I'm not sure whether they're litigious defenders of their intellectual property or advocates of the free sharing of information, that is, libertarians for whom such things as patents and intellectual property rights are unjust monopolies imposed by the state. In case it's the former, here's my description of it:
An image of a man's face, from the nose to the top of his head, with his eye's cast upwards towards a tiny tuft of hair on the top of his otherwise bald head, with the caption: "Grow, dammit, grow!"
This is meant to be a metaphor for the world's economy. They follow this with the statement:
"Economic growth may depend on structural reforms as much as prudent macroeconomic policy."
But here's the thing: The Economist's editorial policy has pretty much had the field for the past few decades. All the crap that they endorse: breaking unions, liberalization, globalization, fiscal restraint, monetarist anti-inflation, ... ALL OF IT, ... has been indulged with increasing intensity since 1980. And it has been precisely these anti-human, deluded, selfish, imbecilic policies that have brought the world to ever larger economic crises.
The world economy teeters on the brink (to say nothing of the world's ecology) because elites have destroyed the material foundations of the world's wealthiest consumer base, creating a system that depended upon increasing levels of household debt and investment bubbles built on ever flimsier premises.
So, I have no interest in even hearing whatever lame-brain structural reforms or prudent macroeconomic policies they're advocating in their magazine. Whatever value can be gleaned from The Economist is far less worthy than the time wasted wading through their deluded drivel.