Here is an e-book debunking Piketty's ideas
https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/anti-pike...
https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/anti-pike...
Before you examine something published by Cato, you can predict its position, and will rarely if ever be surprised by what you read there. The data will be cherry picked or massaged and the argument will be contorted to support the pre-chosen position favorable to the donors funding it.
Cato generally opposes all kinds of taxes and regulations, supports privatization of public institutions and services, opposes a public safety net, opposes campaign finance reform, disputes or downplays global climate change, etc.
No, it doesn't work like that. Reputation matters, and taking it into account is a way to deal with the sad fact of the Bullshit asymmetry principle. Jacobolus is basically saying Cato has cried wolf too many times to be given the benefit of the doubt anymore.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit#Bullshit_asymmetry_pr...: "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."
Cato is known for having bias, not for spewing bullshit. The NYTimes has bias and Piketty has bias. The bullshit asymmetry principle never applies when discussing ideas regardless of the bias. Otherwise you could never argue with any human.
That principle is a lazy cudgel used by people in echo chambers who are incapable of defending ideas or linking to simple refutations of re-used arguments.
Personally I would just rather skip reading them in the first place and focus on sources whose intellectual integrity I have some faith in. I have found it saves time and mental energy with little downside.
But feel free to read what you like.