/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10386251
>5. Experts are smarter than the crowd.
>If you think any of these statements are true, you are retarded.
you're one to talk then

>>10386251
>economics
not science or math

>>10386251
those are not the core ideas of economics. those are the core ideas of a few laissez-faire extremists who hijacked a potentially respectable discipline. You are a useful idiot who behaves in exactly the way that you pretend to criticize: you uncritically accept what you are told. Several of these "core ideas" are completely contrary to empirical fact.

>>10386251
popular western economics are a bunch of smoke and mirrors designed to hide the amoral behavior of the top 0.01%
going to be laughing when north korea is the last man standing.

>>10386286
no they are not, and it requires a great deal of teaching on behalf of economists to get these awful ideas out of people.

>>10386291
yes they are
economics 101 is not legitimate science. it is a tool to indoctrinate the intellectual class. regulation clearly has definite positive effects in certain conditions, which runs completely to your line of thinking. whenever these "core concepts" have been applied in real life to real societies, the results have been disastrous. and the only argument their advocates can muster is "you didn't go far enough."

econlib is lolbertarian propaganda

this is like the equivalent of Jehovah Witnesses claiming to be Christians

All of those ideas are wrong, because more fundamentally:
social institutions shape individual action.
Those ideas only apply within the current liberal capitalist regime and not sure how accurate they are even in such conditions.

>>10386286
Lolbertarians did not hijack economics.
They hijacked pop-economics. In academics they are nobodies. They circlejerk amongst themselves but little else. But that is not what they care about because after all they believe they have a grand unified theory of everything, economically speaking.
What they care about is to reduce taxes for their big family estates and to do that they have to hijack pop-economics and make the public believe that their cult of nonsense has standing within academia, even though it does not.

>>10386301
>whenever these "core concepts" have been applied in real life to real societies, the results have been disastrous.
this is markedly, and unequivocally false. go take an econ course.

>>10386290
This

>>10386311
I think that's a little generous. Through devices like endowed chairs and political positions, money and politics have had an unhealthy influence on the discipline for a long time. And you can just listen to the kinds of views students come out of econ 101 parroting to know it's not on the level.

>>10386312

>>10386348
>there is a gigantic conspiracy theory going on
go back to >>>/x/

>>10386370
look, fucko, these things are in plain sight, and you're using the "conspiracy theory" boogeyman to put them down without argument. people like milton friedman are propped up to justify laissez-faire agendas all the time. pop economics is central to our modern political debate. you'd be crazy to not expect this would have a distorting effect on the field.

This isn't science.

>>10386421
nor is math

Give me the most mathematically intensive Econ book, excluding game theory.

I've read the basic books, it's all trivial.

>have a certain level of labour demand
>import a huge labour supply
>expect no change in labour price and residual labour demand
why do lolberts deny basic supply and demand?

>>10386251
fuck off Marx
its been 40 years, time to get a job

>>10386307
>social institutions shape individual action.
>capitalist regime
LUL, go in the complaint department, coz I just voluntarily fucked your mother

>>10386311
>economics
>academics
yeah, you see, people on Wall ST are not that much of intellectuals or academics, they just tend to do better with money than 99.99% of the academics, who "teach" marxist bs

practice what you preach

>>10386307
kek
this is what sociology nerds tell themselves?
what a grand and intoxicating innocence

>>10386251
Found the liberal communist.

Friendly reminder, every developed nation grew because they didn't follow standard economics doctrine, all the 3rd world nations that were imposed by the IMF and world Bank to follow textbook shit are still poor.
Go figure.

>>10386497

>>10386464
>excluding game theory
But that's the only part of mathematical econ that's actually fun.

If you prefer math that gets applied to existing economic systems, look into optimal control theory (pic related). I'd describe it geometrically as "using Hamilton-Jacobi to study foliations of constructed manifolds" (it seems to me that economic intuition is "geometric" in spirit, in contrast to the "algebraic" character of economic mechanisms. Or maybe I'm reading too much into this).

>>10386497
>implying immigration rates don't respond to demand as well
Dunning Kruger in action.

>>10387131
Thanks for the tip, though I wouldn't assume OPTIMAL control of many economic systems as most rules are based on the PRAGMATIC. But in complex economic systems often all hell breaks loose, or the system goes to an absorbing state, or it bounces wildly between constraints.

About economics, I would say the intuition is mostly Malkavian.

You guys need two lists...

First, your real core of economics:
1. The need for supply surpasses the need to spend.
2. There are only real norms in a market with value, otherwise are norms of value and then there are none.
3. If a market requires a distribution point, the market is surpassed its own economy and requires a recess.
4. When a market succumbs to demand, a market must require itself to demand all country men and women to distribute demand as the sum cost of all goods and redistribute that wealth in the form of welfare.

Second list is the necessary terms for requiring a market...
1. If a market is square, it is capable.
2. If a market has value, there are buyers.
3. If a market needs new demands, there are no reliable ways to acquire surplurs. Generate funds.
4. There are only winners and losers in games, the games must exist outside the law.
5. If a law isn't tangible, it is not producing a law of goods and must be removed any form of government and replaced by policy to remove such laws and distribute to require laws to settle to the constitution.

>>10386251
>rent controls help tenants

Rent controls are the worlds second most effective way to destroy cities after bombings. Bad post.

>>10386464

>>10386952
- "foreign-born share" does not equal labour force size
- correlation lack of causation blah blah blah
- kike

>>10387451
your point?

>>10388006
you didn't even read the whole post then

>>10386251
>1. People don’t respond very strongly to economic incentives. (I.e., the demand for life-saving drugs is very inelastic.)
Yes. They don't. The human condition is fatally flawed.
>2. Imported goods, immigrant labor, and automation all tend to increase the unemployment rate.
No shit. And yet economists are often the ones hailing the value of immigrant labor and free trade.
>3. Most companies have a lot of control over prices. (I.e. oil companies set prices, not “the market”.)
They inherently do being cohesive organizations whereas "the market" is a nonentity combined with millions of conflicting interests.
>4. Policy disputes over taxes and regulations are best thought of in terms of who gains and who loses.
That's because the natural order shows resources as a zero-sum game. To reject this is to reject nature itself.
Your ancestors did not see the economic good of gaining competitive advantage with the low IQ tribe even though both benefited in your stupid childish scenario. Do you know what they did? They beat the other tribe to death and took all resources for themselves.
>5. Experts are smarter than the crowd.
Yes. One need only look at statistics on IQ.
>6. Speculators make market prices more unstable.
They do. Case in point, real estate values in Australia.
>7. Price gouging hurts consumers.
For essential conditions, such as housing or foodstuffs, it does.
>8. Rent controls help tenants.
As it has historically been implemented, it hurts them as it creates scarcity and the desire to hold on to cheap properties. This can be remedied with an expiration date for high demand areas, or better yet, state owned mass housing facilities limited to 1 occupant with zero guest per individual to prevent the exigency of not being homeless. This would in turn make people seek out rent, not out of necessity but for want of improved conditions.

>These myths are all widely believed by the general public.
You contradicted the inverse of point #5.

>>10388298
>"foreign-born share" does not equal labour force size
The claim was that immigration increases unemployment.

>correlation lack of causation blah blah blah
Correlation is expected with causation. Explain why no correlation is found.

>kike
>>>/pol/

>your point?
His point is that immigration is not a random supply that gets dumped on a country, it responds to demand.

>>10386370
>there aren't multiple gigantic conspiracies going on at any one time

you probably believe in wars for freedom, global warming, mendelian inheritance and the standard model