And yes, we now have empirical validation of these observations, which date back over a century. Marx's citation patterns had a significant boost from the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, after remaining relatively flat in the preceding decades.

@MattPolProf You'll be happy to know that I have been deemed a Marxist now by the NatCon right.

Apparently I am a Marxist now, according to the NatCon crowd, because I oppose their agenda of taxing trade. It sure was nice when words meant things...

I literally denounced the Biden student loan forgiveness as unconstitutional on national media several times, including a Fox segment when the ruling was handed down. But NatCons are uninterested in facts...

The NatCon weirdos have now convinced themselves that I am a Marxist.

@retirement321 It's unconstitutional.

@aphofer Exactly

@pat_revenge As noted, tariffs don't succeed at doing any of those things.

@XmEconomics I know of no economist who adheres to that strawman belief.

I literally wrote the top-referenced legislative history of the Morrill Tariff act. This is the NatCon tariff crowd's equivalent of the Marxists who shout "you haven't read Marx!" without realizing I also edited a book of Marx's writings.

@CrossWil95392 Yes, hence why it is alarming to see JD Vance adopt Biden's strategy of attacking judicial review.

@_MikeMoss You deny the existence of judicial review? Strange.

@JohnJSSoriano @michaelbd It's all projection. Note that the guy who's assigning sweeping and erroneous views to economists writ large is also purporting to speak on behalf of some nebulous training in "statesmanship" that comes from an undergrad level of familiarity with international relations theory

RT @JohnJSSoriano: "The costs of tariffs are well-known," and then inaccurately describes the costs of tariffs. There is weird assumption (…

@Charlen20942771 There's a hearing next week to do exactly that. It was ordered by this "wacko activist"

@Soxwin35 The order literally asks the exec branch to submit its arguments in writing by 5pm tuesday.

@BrianTerry180 @ProjectVirginia @ValidScience So you're telling me you can't read?

@GS612 Yes.

@KurtCouchman @michaelbd Thin or not, there is clear statutory oversight on executive branch execution. And there's clear judicial review of whether those statutes are being followed. An expeditious court hearing is a reasonable venue to evaluate the competing claims, no?

The order is very short and straightforward. It says there's a legitimate question to review over whether the APA & related statutes are being violated, pauses the audit until this can be reviewed, invites the two parties to file their arguments, and sets an expedited hearing to review it. Nothing out of the ordinary, and certainly nothing warranting the hyperbolic claims of JD Vance.