<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GrowthGate?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://larrywillmore.net/blog/index.php/2009/12/11/growthgate/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://larrywillmore.net/blog/2009/12/11/growthgate/</link>
	<description>Semi-daily posts, related largely to economics and government policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2012 18:36:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. Watson</title>
		<link>http://larrywillmore.net/blog/2009/12/11/growthgate/comment-page-1/#comment-735</link>
		<dc:creator>D. Watson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:42:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://larrywillmore.net/blog/?p=578#comment-735</guid>
		<description>Just for the record, I would think &quot;accused&quot; too strong a term. One of the things I admire about Easterly (as seen in White Man&#039;s Burden) is his willingness to say, &quot;I used to think X, and I was wrong.&quot; I looked at it as giving him an opportunity for further clarification. In fact, that&#039;s what he said about one of the three papers (with some caveats). For another he said that the results supported his current conclusion in that they were &#039;negative&#039; results. But yes, we are still looking forward to that further illumination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just for the record, I would think &#8220;accused&#8221; too strong a term. One of the things I admire about Easterly (as seen in White Man&#8217;s Burden) is his willingness to say, &#8220;I used to think X, and I was wrong.&#8221; I looked at it as giving him an opportunity for further clarification. In fact, that&#8217;s what he said about one of the three papers (with some caveats). For another he said that the results supported his current conclusion in that they were &#8216;negative&#8217; results. But yes, we are still looking forward to that further illumination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.264 seconds -->

