Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: koan who wrote (62809)	10/21/2007 3:23:19 AM
From: Joe Btfsplk	Read Replies (1) of 90947

koan, upon consideration I've decided to waste some minutes of my time and some seconds of yours. Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources that have alternative uses -- over time. The best analogy I can come up with is a billiards game in four dimensions. This is complicated by the fact that the number of balls in play will spontaneously increase exponentially under better conditions. Mathematical calculations can be useful, but in the end economics is more of a philosophy than a hard science. It is predicated on analyzing and projecting past experience. The proper study of economics is separate from and takes precedence over other philosophies. Economic action is what makes possible the consideration of the number of angels and the heads of pins. Picking an arbitrary starting point, imagine a band of starving primitives sitting around a fire in a cave, feasting on a bucket of grubs. Only they don't have a bucket; hasn't yet been invented, let alone gained distribution. A good economist will analyze how these shivering schmucks will act so their successors can have a TV, and all the associated technology, so they might acquire culture by watching the Simpsons and South Park, et al. I'm in no danger of being appointed a chair in economics at even a minor university. Still I developed an interest years ago and probably have a pretty good lay understanding of the spectrum of thought; inferior to, say, Tim's, yet better than victims of Samuelson and Heilbroner. Some "economists" are better than others, even if none achieve perfection. The first economic text I read was Galbraith's Money: Whence it came.... Been too long; didn't have the background to analyze it, and don't remember if it was as sloppy as his other thought. A lot of the current foolish and stupid antipathy toward corporations stem from Galbraith. If the world was run right he'd have done hard time for impersonating an economist. I'm not competent to offer an analysis of Weber and your other examples are irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next