The main thing to remember about this site is that it's a blog. It's most likely one person's perspective on a single issue without peer review. In such circumstances, the most credibility one could attribute to this blog is if one looked into the blogger's personal background, into their credentials. Are they, for instance, an economist? Or a political scientist?
Failing that, look into their sources and see if you come to the same conclusions as they do when you look at them independently.
Based on my initial look-over, it doesn't seem that credible to me. It's not a in a journal or other respectable peer-reviewed medium, so I'd be suspicious of it at best. It might have some decent information, but I'd certainly look into its sources before accepting what it says.
Failing that, look into their sources and see if you come to the same conclusions as they do when you look at them independently.
Based on my initial look-over, it doesn't seem that credible to me. It's not a in a journal or other respectable peer-reviewed medium, so I'd be suspicious of it at best. It might have some decent information, but I'd certainly look into its sources before accepting what it says.
If you believe it, question it. If you question it, get an answer. If you have an answer, does that answer satisfy reality? Does it satisfy you? Probably not. For no one else will agree with you, not really.
