Why does anyone pay attention to people that study "economics"? - page 11.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: 2112 on January 18, 2015, 05:00:39 PM

Because the scientific economists are willing and capable of building the statistical and mathematical models that in practice do work and have a decent predictive power about the future of the economy.

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

2112

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1068

Quote from: CIYAM on January 18, 2015, 04:54:46 PM

You are therefore assuming I support "Austrian economists" (admittedly I think they are less deluded in comparison to the Keynsian ones).

But actually I support none of them at all - as economics is not a science.

OK, my attempt at answer through a negative didn't work. So here's the more straightforward answer:

Because the scientific economists are willing and capable of building the statistical and mathematical models that in practice do work and have a decent predictive power about the future of the economy.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: unsoindovo on January 18, 2015, 04:57:39 PM

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Energy-and-Environment/Uranium,-Electricity-and-Climate-Change/

Very strange that you would quote something from a vested party (Nuclear energy).

Again - think harder please (don't post *ads* from funded agencies).

unsoindovo

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 1042

https://locktrip.com/?refId=40964

Quote from: CIYAM on January 18, 2015, 04:44:34 PM

Quote from: iruu on January 18, 2015, 04:39:49 PM

There's nothing weird in infinite expansion

Except - double the world's energy consumption every year for the next 50 years are we are all gone (perhaps not weird - but the end of our species).

maybe did you mean double world's energy consumption in the next 50 year!!!
...and not every years!!!

here some stats:

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Energy-and-Environment/Uranium,-Electricity-and-Climate-Change/

i think who the correct increase of the world's energy consumption it is doubled in 20/25 years...

you do not think so???

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: 2112 on January 18, 2015, 04:52:47 PM

How about an answer through a negative?

Q: Why it is so easy for everyone in academia to dismiss the so called "austrian economics"?

A: Because the Austrians propose that mathematical modeling and statistical methods do not apply in the real world economy.

You are therefore assuming I support "Austrian economists" (admittedly I think they are less deluded in comparison to the Keynsian ones).

But actually I support none of them at all - as economics is not a science.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: dewdeded on January 18, 2015, 04:52:19 PM

It's easy:
- Humans will always innovate, this will never stop. So there will always be increased efficiency allowing infinite expansion.
- Also as you noticed but didn't think through. Earth isn't the limit.
Just think about easy example: we may not find another earth, but maybe we soon put our waste on the moon and get raw materials from Mars or if the Earth gets to small we live in space station like ISS.

It has been studied and it won't work. So think again.

2112

legendary

Activity: 2128

Merit: 1068

How about an answer through a negative?

Q: Why it is so easy for everyone in academia to dismiss the so called "austrian economics"?

A: Because the Austrians propose that mathematical modeling and statistical methods do not apply in the real world economy.

dewdeded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1011

Monero Evangelist

It's easy:
- Humans will always innovate, this will never stop. So there will always be increased efficiency allowing infinite expansion.
- Also as you noticed but didn't think through. Earth isn't the limit.
Just think about easy example: we may not find another earth, but maybe we soon put our waste on the moon and get raw materials from Mars or if the Earth gets to small we live in space station like ISS.

Aswan

legendary

Activity: 1734

Merit: 1015

Quote from: CIYAM on January 18, 2015, 03:45:04 PM

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)

I think it is because life is short and unless those resources are used up before they die, they do not care.

unsoindovo

legendary

Activity: 1932

Merit: 1042

https://locktrip.com/?refId=40964

Quote from: Meuh6879 on January 18, 2015, 04:09:06 PM

because, they are rich (and usually, talk too and work none).

ahahahahaha

this make me rolling on the floor laughing

Cheesy

but at the end... i think the same...

just that I could not have said it better

Wink

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: iruu on January 18, 2015, 04:39:49 PM

There's nothing weird in infinite expansion

Except - double the world's energy consumption every year for the next 50 years are we are all gone (perhaps not weird - but the end of our species).

iruu

full member

Activity: 148

Merit: 100

There's nothing weird in infinite expansion. The expansion is in utility provided. Making and storing a good movie, a game or a book doesn't consume much energy or resources, except that needed to sustain the human makers, which exist anyway.
There indeed are theoretical thermodynamic limits to this (Bekenstein bound), but they are so high there's room for millions of years of growth.

Utility gained per marginal energy unit is dropping for decades now. Eg. there are physical limits to how much food a human can consume.

In the future per capita energy use will probably drastically decrease, at the same increasing the quality of life. Outside of obvious things, like increases in efficiency, consider improvements to humans themselves. For example, the eye - what would happen if everyone could get an artificial eyes with much, much higher light sensitivity? Energy expenditures for lighting would drop by orders of magnitude and never recover.

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

Quote from: dewdeded on January 18, 2015, 04:34:07 PM

OP: What about you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics and rephrase your question?

How about you just post something other than a link (like say an argument or a point)?

(lame post gets a lame reply)

dewdeded

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1011

Monero Evangelist

OP: What about you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics and rephrase your question?

Meuh6879

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1011

because, they are rich (and usually, talk too and work none).

CIYAM

legendary

Activity: 1890

Merit: 1078

Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer

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)

Topic: Why does anyone pay attention to people that study "economics"? - page 11. (Read 9525 times)