Why You Should Read the Text, Not Just the Tables

Keith Hennessey, the last head of the National Economic Council before Larry Summers, has a blog post out (hat tip Alex Tabarrok) reviewing yesterday’s announcement by the Obama administration on their proposed new CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) standards. It links to a very informative report that I’m still digesting. (I was planning a post on the economics of CAFE for today, but now I need to read part of that report.)

Update: I found a mistake in the way Hennessey used a table and I posted about it here. Hennessey graciously acknowledged the mistake, fixed it on his post, and left a comment here. So I decided to delete my criticism. I really should have sent him an email first, and I feel bad about that. 

By James Kwak

3 responses to “Why You Should Read the Text, Not Just the Tables

  1. khennessey

    I have corrected my mistake. Thanks for catching it.

  2. donthelibertariandemocrat

    In my opinion, what just occurred is what’s good about blogs, and posters should welcome criticism and proofreading from others.

    At least Hennessey linked to the information, as many people make assertions that can’t be easily tracked down.

    I wish you would have left posted your point about the importance of determining the assumptions and presuppositions that posters base their arguments upon. That’s essential analysis, and I appreciate when posters put them forth themselves.

  3. comet schmutz

    James,

    Overall, I salute your impeccable manners, which are essential to a civilized society.

    But in this case, I agree with “donthe”-etcetera.

    James, this reminds me of when Surowiecki disagreed with a point you made a week or so ago, and you wrote that he didn’t like you.

    Was that a holdover from your days in management consulting, where you fear that any disagreement might aggrieve a potential client, and thereby you yourself fear anyone’s pointed disagreement with you?

    There is a point where you can go overboard with tiptoe-ing, and that risks making a mockery of the actual significance of good manners.