Why does anyone pay attention to people that study "economics"?

[CIYAM]

To reach another planet is basically so ridiculously hard that we can only hope to perhaps go back to the Moon and

... start drilling for oil there!  

Well - I do hope that the US spends a few trillion dollars looking for oil on the Moon (as that would be money most otherwise likely to be spent on its military).

[1714755227]

1714755227

[1714755227]

1714755227

[dewdeded]

You seam like to have already found your answer(s). This is my last try communicating with you (on this issue):

So what I really wonder is when the Keynsian trained people are finally going to admit that "infinite expansion" is not possible.

They NEVER will. It's part of the model, one general assumption of their whole "theoretical system".

Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows this (it is so simple I could teach it to a child who understand math).

(Last try, won't reply again:)
- Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows every complex software system and technologies can always be improved (through research and science).
- Every single computer programmer or mathematician knows these improvements and optimizations lead to increased (better) efficiency (e.g. in ressource usage).
- Now every single computer programmer or mathematician should be able to realize that this increased efficiency satisfies the assumption of infinite expansion, at least in this theoretical model.

Because as stated above, denying this would mean: we reach a situation, where the mankind isnt able do improvements and optimizations through brainwork (research and science) anymore.



Have a nice day CIYAM, you are a good poster overall.

[2112]

Well - that is interesting - so who are these scientific economists and why haven't we heard of them before (or is this a joke)?

Probably because you can't understand the underlying mathematics.

One would have to live under the stone to not hear about e.g. Black-Scholes option pricing model.

[twiifm]

Clearly you have no clue about economics or Keynsianism. 

Nobody disputes that resources are finite.  Economics tries to explain why things happen in the economy.  Keynes big contribution is the idea of looking at aggregate forces thus the birth of macro

[CIYAM]

Now every single computer programmer or mathematician should be able to realize that this increased efficiency satisfies the assumption of infinite expansion, at least in this theoretical model.

Because as stated above, denying this would mean: we reach a situation, where the mankind isn't able do improvements and optimizations through brainwork (research and science) anymore.

Okay - that at least makes some sense to me - thanks for the patience.

[CIYAM]

One would have to live under the stone to not hear about e.g. Black-Scholes option pricing model.

Well the building is actually cement but I guess that's pretty much the same as stone.

[arbitrage001]

At least in the Keynsian variety.

The entire concept is built on infinite expansion which anyone with even half a brain should now know doesn't work as our Earth has "finite" resources (and our ability to find another Earth is not going to happen before we have exhausted this one's natural resources in trying to find it).

I actually think it is rather funny that we have people that are awarded Nobel prizes and given high status at universities (and in governments) when their pseudo-science is really no different to a cult or a religion.

(yes - I like to stir the pot sometimes - so come on you Keynsian fans and smite me)

Existing power structure (goverment/institution) in place operates in a top down manner, of course they will favor and promote any scholars that view the same way.

[twiifm]

At least in the Keynsian variety.

The entire concept is built on infinite expansion which anyone with even half a brain should now know doesn't work as our Earth has "finite" resources (and our ability to find another Earth is not going to happen before we have exhausted this one's natural resources in trying to find it).

I actually think it is rather funny that we have people that are awarded Nobel prizes and given high status at universities (and in governments) when their pseudo-science is really no different to a cult or a religion.

(yes - I like to stir the pot sometimes - so come on you Keynsian fans and smite me)

Existing power structure (goverment/institution) in place operates in a top down manner, of course they will favor and promote any scholars that view the same way.

"I know what I'm talking about despite experts devoting their lives to study subjects that I know nothing about, therefore I am smart and everyone else is dumb"  hmm, I wonder

[CIYAM]

"I know what I'm talking about despite experts devoting their lives to study subjects that I know nothing about, therefore I am smart and everyone else is dumb"  hmm, I wonder

Fair enough - but it is not that I can't be convinced that economic theory (in particular that of Keynes) is both rational and indeed useful so perhaps if my arrogant tone (which was actually meant to be more tongue in cheek) could be overlooked by someone who understands and would like to enlighten me then I am willing to be enlightened.

[Possum577]

Everything has it's opposition...

[twiifm]

"I know what I'm talking about despite experts devoting their lives to study subjects that I know nothing about, therefore I am smart and everyone else is dumb"  hmm, I wonder

Fair enough - but it is not that I can't be convinced that economic theory (in particular that of Keynes) is both rational and indeed useful so perhaps if my arrogant tone (which was actually meant to be more tongue in cheek) could be overlooked by someone who understands and would like to enlighten me then I am willing to be enlightened.

Do you have specific questions?  Which of Keynes ideas you want to know about?

[CIYAM]

Do you have specific questions?  Which of Keynes ideas you want to know about?

Yes - specifically I want to understand why "infinite expansion" is necessary to his economic theory (as it doesn't seem to make much sense to me).

[steelhouse]

One thing you can ask Krugman if you get a chance.  Since QE is suppose to be used for asset purchases (overvalued homes most likely schemes of bankers, real estate investors, and appraisers) or for buying treasuries.  If QE is suppose to help the economy and the poor, why doesn't the federal reserve just write the people a check?

I think Krugman and the Federal Reserve can easily be seen as frauds.

[twiifm]

Do you have specific questions?  Which of Keynes ideas you want to know about?

Yes - specifically I want to understand why "infinite expansion" is necessary to his economic theory (as it doesn't seem to make much sense to me).

where did you read this? I never heard of it before.  Can you post a link so I can read?

What kind do expansion are you referring to?  Credit expansion or population growth?

[twiifm]

One thing you can ask Krugman if you got a chance.  Since QE is suppose to be used for asset purchases (overvalued homes most likely schemes of bankers, real estate investors, and appraisers) or for buying treasuries.  If QE is suppose to help the economy and the poor, why doesn't the federal reserve just write the people a check?

I think Krugman and the Federal Reserve can easily seen as a fraud.

They don't have authority to do that.  But Obama did try a small stimulus in the form of a tax rebate I think.

QE happened because they lowered interest to zero and nothing happened, no borrowing.  So they did QE to inject liquidity into banks reserves.  But the theory is flawed because it wasn't lack of liquidity it was lack of borrowers.  They have no tools to force people to borrow

[CIYAM]

where did you read this? I never heard of it before.  Can you post a link so I can read?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth

What kind do expansion are you referring to?  Credit expansion or population growth?

Economic growth fundamentally.

[freedomno1]

I guess if their is a reason to study economics its so people will make logical judgments about what they buy
Assuming they are rational beings of course  
If not then we can just throw out all human rationale into it and say we live in chaos.

As to why their popular, its because some areas of economics are valid so it can't be completely ignored such as in transportation economics with the hotelling model people do operate in a geographical range to get stuff (Like Pizza) even with internet technology.
http://www.tutor2u.net/blog/index.php/economics/comments/game-theory-the-hotelling-model-of-spatial-location

That said I have more irks with econ and super simple models than agreement myself, and the excuse that very complex models are impossible while  we can observe simple models that are probably true is a fundamental basis to making mistakes.

[picolo]

At least in the Keynsian variety.

The entire concept is built on infinite expansion which anyone with even half a brain should now know doesn't work as our Earth has "finite" resources (and our ability to find another Earth is not going to happen before we have exhausted this one's natural resources in trying to find it).

I actually think it is rather funny that we have people that are awarded Nobel prizes and given high status at universities (and in governments) when their pseudo-science is really no different to a cult or a religion.

(yes - I like to stir the pot sometimes - so come on you Keynsian fans and smite me)

Usually people who get the Economics nobel prizes did very good research in their are of research but they can be very incoherent or keynesian in other areas.
The problem is the correct economic laws are not taught in school.

[twiifm]

where did you read this? I never heard of it before.  Can you post a link so I can read?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth

What kind do expansion are you referring to?  Credit expansion or population growth?

Economic growth fundamentally.

I read that link and I'm not sure what you asking about Keynes.  He views economics with aggregate demand as the driver.  Because of this, he prioritize employment.  Employment drives GDP rather than GDP driving employment.  His whole thing was that external shocks can send economies spiraling out of control and in those situation only the govt have the to do something. 

[johnyj]

Economics has always been politics, not science. From science perspective, since the value is all subjective, there is no standard in anything

This is especially true regarding money and banking, a 10 year old can understand better than economy professors: He would just copy his own money instead of singing IRR, NPV, CPI, GDP, M3, etc... And you see, FED is doing exactly the same thing