Republican primaries.

[Nicodeamus]

I listen to a lot of economists, yes. I dont pretend I know more than most of them I leave that for peeps like you.

no you listen to some economics... like how some religious people listen to creationist science. Your post bashing the Austrian school of economics only shows to me that you have absolutely no idea what your criticising and what you're talking about. As a matter of fact there are many 'empirical schools' as you put it like the Chicago school of economics that almost always agree with the Austrian school, but you obviously know better than Milton Friedman or Von Hayek, it is not as if both of them won Nobel prices in economics.

 

[w1z4rd]

no you listen to some economics... like how some religious people listen to creationist science. Your post bashing the Austrian school of economics only shows to me that you have absolutely no idea what your criticising and what you're talking about.

The creationists tell me the same thing Stupid biologists and real economists.... what do they know... its all a conspiracy

 

[Nicodeamus]

The creationists tell me the same thing Stupid biologists and real economists.... what do they know... its all a conspiracy

It is time for you to win a Nobel price, obviously those economics who did win it don't have a clue...
It is surprising however that you choose to support the opinion of economics who didn't even predict the financial crisis.... how does that work?

 

[w1z4rd]

Even they admit they just pulled this stuff out of their asses

The Austrians seem to follow the maxim "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull****." If you couldn't wade through all their econo-speak and arbitrary redefinitions of commonly used terms, however, they do the work for you and come straight out and say they just made everything up. Ludwig von Mises wrote of his theory, "its statements and propositions are not derived from experience... They are not subject to verification or falsification on the ground of experience and facts." F.A. Hayek wrote that any theories in the social sciences can "never be verified or falsified by reference to facts."[14][15]

In other words, it's economic theology. An entire (albeit minor) school of economics has published book after book and paper upon paper just to say all problems can be boiled down to "gubmint did it" and all solutions can be described as "free market always wins." Despite this, their influence (on the internets, at least) seems to be growing, at least since 2008 and the proliferation of "Peter Schiff was right!!11!!" videos. Hayek's book The Road to Serfdom also got the Glenn Beck bump when it was mentioned on his show.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

 

[Nicodeamus]

Even they admit they just pulled this stuff out of their asses


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school

they do not use empirical models to PREDICT their theories that does not mean that they neglect facts... As I said earlier you read 1 post on the internet about bashing them and then you pretend to have an idea. How is this any different from what the people in the philosophical debate sections do?

 

[w1z4rd]

they do not use empirical models to PREDICT their theories that does not mean that they neglect facts... As I said earlier you read 1 post on the internet about bashing them and then you pretend to have an idea. How is this any different from what the people in the philosophical debate sections do?

No, there are entire websites dedicated to the subject actually. Your attempt to belittle what I have experienced to "one post" is so patently false and untrue. Imagine that. Someone lied to make a point against me. How much is THAT like the arguments used by creationists in the PD? Splinter, log, eye #fail


Here are some interesting links to the "1 post" I read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticisms
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
http://politicalaffairs.net/the-con-job-of-libertarian-economics/
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

A small example of the "1 post" I apparently drew my opinion on.

Its sad people cant tell the difference between a far right utopian ideology and real world economics :/ I guess thats why those people will never become presidents *kof*Paul*kof*

In the mean time there is a good article on Skeptic.com called "The unlikeliest cult in history", that talks about some interesting stuff.

http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/the-unlikeliest-cult-in-history/

 

[WilD_CaT]

No, there are entire websites dedicated to the subject actually. Your attempt to belittle what I have experienced to "one post" is so patently false and untrue. Imagine that. Someone lied to make a point against me. How much is THAT like the arguments used by creationists in the PD? Splinter, log, eye #fail


Here are some interesting links to the "1 post" I read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Criticisms
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Austrian_school
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/bcaplan/whyaust.htm
http://politicalaffairs.net/the-con-job-of-libertarian-economics/
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/libindex.html

A small example of the "1 post" I apparently drew my opinion on.

Its sad people cant tell the difference between a far right utopian ideology and real world economics :/ I guess thats why those people will never become presidents *kof*Paul*kof*

In the mean time there is a good article on Skeptic.com called "The unlikeliest cult in history", that talks about some interesting stuff.

http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/the-unlikeliest-cult-in-history/

And once again, you do exactly what he says you do.

Human beings cannot be modeled on historical data, it makes to many assumptions and makes a mockery of economics economic understanding.

Another thing you don't get, is that many Austrian Theories are used by ALL other economic schools at the micro-level, but they decide to reject that logic at the macro level only. The difference between Austrians and Chicago School economics is really only in the sphere of macro economic understanding.

For example, the subjective theory of value and marginal utilility. Ask anyone who has taken any economics at varsity and they will have learn't marginal utility.

So basically you are saying ALL economists are "cultish pseudo scientists".

Moreover you still haven't addressed his fundemental criticism of your position on Austrian, which is that you reject logic as being unscientific. As he and I have both pointed out before, mathematics is a logical and not an empirical discipline.

Thus your argument becomes, because maths doesn't use the scientific method, we should reject it?

Again, in your mind, only empirical evidence or methods is science, which is actually not true.

PS: If you are ever in JHB, I challenge you to join one of ouw libertarian dinners here and debate Leon Louw. Look him up.

 

[Nicodeamus]

And once again, you do exactly what he says you do.

Human beings cannot be modeled on historical data, it makes to many assumptions and makes a mockery of economics economic understanding.

Another thing you don't get, is that many Austrian Theories are used by ALL other economic schools at the micro-level, but they decide to reject that logic at the macro level only. The difference between Austrians and Chicago School economics is really only in the sphere of macro economic understanding.

For example, the subjective theory of value and marginal utilility. Ask anyone who has taken any economics at varsity and they will have learn't marginal utility.

So basically you are saying ALL economists are "cultish pseudo scientists".

Moreover you still haven't addressed his fundemental criticism of your position on Austrian, which is that you reject logic as being unscientific. As he and I have both pointed out before, mathematics is a logical and not an empirical discipline.

Thus your argument becomes, because maths doesn't use the scientific method, we should reject it?

Again, in your mind, only empirical evidence or methods is science, which is actually not true.

PS: If you are ever in JHB, I challenge you to join one of ouw libertarian dinners here and debate Leon Louw. Look him up.

It is pointless, I give up. I don't think he even understands how samplings and distributions work to begin with.

 

[boramk]

Ron Paul is coming to speak tomorrow at my University..
Think I'll go, should be pretty interesting..

 

[w1z4rd]

Ron Paul is coming to speak tomorrow at my University..
Think I'll go, should be pretty interesting..

You are so lucky. I would go


Here is an interesting factoid to present him with:

"Of the 22 states that went to McCain in 2008, 86 percent received more federal spending than they paid in taxes in 2010. In contrast, 55 percent of the states that went to Obama received more federal spending than they paid in taxes. Republican states, on average, received $1.46 in federal spending for every tax dollar paid; Democratic states, on average, received $1.16."
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/11/red-states-are-the-real-welfare-states/

Red states pay less of the federal taxes, spend more of the federal dollars, and complain the most about having to pay taxes.
Blue states pay more of the federal taxes, and spend less of the federal dollars. And they also complain less about having to pay taxes.

An entire party of hypocrites.

 

[boramk]

Im here right now at the Ron Paul convention as we speak. First things I've noticed is how white the crowd is haha

 

[boramk]

His mic kept breaking lol.
So far his been talking about his foreign policy.. Which I totally support.

He started on the Federal Reserve. That I don't agree on, getting rid of it won't help anything.

 

[boramk]

All in all, it was pretty average.. His supporters were very ardent though, and I agreed with him on a lot of his views minus the ones on taxation and federal reserve.
He really is an old man though, going down the podium seemed like a bit of a mission for him.

I respect that he keeps on what he believes and that he doesn't flip flop, and he's right. America has spent trillions overseas on war and not at home. Of course this is because most American politicians are bought by these military contractors. But realistically, he is not going to get the nomination so why he is still running, I don't know. His speeches made it seem like he could still get it. All in all, I find the situation in this country hopeless: this guy who has no hope of winning and the other candidates are all just fundamentalist, bought out corrupt politicians.

Reduce the debt and do nothing about America's crumbling infrastructure, spend on infrastructure or education and increase debt. Everyone in the political spectrum just fights each other instead of addressing the issue making everything a whole lot worse.