Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (205513)	10/11/2006 1:00:36 AM
From: Geoff Altman	Respond to of 281500

ROTFLAMAO!

To: Ilaine who wrote (205513)	10/11/2006 10:18:30 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Capitalist economic theorists dominate the Nobel Prizes for Economics. If you can recall a socialist economic theorist who got the Nobel in your lifetime for theorizing about the beauties of socialist economics, please refresh my recollection. Huh? I don't recall anything I said as pushing socialist economic theories. I did say that "market driven" motivations for research, where you desire a certain result, as compared to the scientific method of trying to understand the most accurate description, is a problem. I would consider that a problem equally when studying economics as in atmospheric science or lung cancer. Hence when I see institutions (Cato for example) so spectacularly wrong for so long on something like tobacco and lung cancer, I suspect their predictive accuracy on say global warming might be suspect, since the root issue for Cato in both examples is economics, which, as any numbskull should know, has zero to do with the science of either topic. It is even vaguely possible that they are similarly out to lunch on some economic and political theories. As an example, China is doing a very excellent job (so far) of showing that stability might trump freedom when it comes to economic growth. One can compare Russia post Communism with China to understand that. I'm pretty sure Cato would have got that one spectacularly wrong back in the late 1980's as well. Ideology in general is a very poor basis for acquiring knowledge.