Thread Rating:

bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 54
  • Posts: 1582
October 17th, 2012 at 10:40:17 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

I agree, these are two big guys, no shirts and 8"
Bowie knives. Course Bigfoot is pushing 300 pounds,
maybe shirts is a good idea.



I am actually way over 300. I just told Mission that I was "larger than when I wrestled at 285 lbs 6 years ago"
Vote for Nobody 2020!
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
October 17th, 2012 at 10:46:20 PM permalink
Quote: sunrise089



If you want to say you wish economics were more homogeneous



Its the witchcraft of the modern age, everybody is an expert. And nobody
is an expert.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
October 17th, 2012 at 10:48:06 PM permalink
Quote: bigfoot66

I am actually way over 300.



Hmm. Could you be more specific? Way over
could mean 330 or 370.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
bigfoot66
bigfoot66
Joined: Feb 5, 2010
  • Threads: 54
  • Posts: 1582
October 17th, 2012 at 10:54:39 PM permalink
“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.”

― Friedrich von Hayek

Economics is a science in so far as it is an attempt to describe the real world. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to run large scale economic experiments in any kind of practical or ethical manner. Combine this with the fact that modern economies comprise hundreds of millions of people engaging in dozens of transactions each every single day and the idea of trying to isolate the effects of, say, a regulatory change, or a new technology, or a period of inflation, becomes very difficult. Thus there are historical examples of any given government policy being correlated with just about any outcome. For example murder rates are positively correlated with ice cream sales. There was an academic paper a few years back that presented data to support their claim that a rise in the minimum wage had lead to a decrease in unemployment, a claim that is absurd on its face. So yeah, economics is a field where there is more disagreement among the experts than, say, chemistry.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
EvenBob
EvenBob
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
  • Threads: 434
  • Posts: 25333
October 17th, 2012 at 10:57:40 PM permalink
Quote: bigfoot66



Economics is a science in so far as it is an attempt to describe the real world.



Every economic theory requires the perfect storm
of events to make it happen. Since this is impossible,
every economist is on an island all by himself.
"It's not enough to succeed, your friends must fail." Gore Vidal
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 10367
October 17th, 2012 at 11:20:20 PM permalink
I think most lay people view economists (at least the talking head ones on TV) much as the mysterious oracles of old. Not sure exactly what they said; and don't know if the coming year is going to be sunshine or meteors.
Everything is in high definition today except Bigfoot and UFOs
AceTwo
AceTwo
Joined: Mar 13, 2012
  • Threads: 5
  • Posts: 359
October 18th, 2012 at 5:51:26 AM permalink
Economics like all social sciences try to describe and most importantly predict Human behaviour.
Physical sciences decribe and predict the physical laws (behaviour) of nature and matter, like describing and predicting the effects of gravity.
Economists make certain assumptions about the behaviour of humans (like rational thought, access to information etc) in order to make their theories and have theories that make valid assumptions.
Some of the assumptions might be not 100% absolutely true. Like all humans behaving rationally with regard to what is in their economic interest. But that does not negate the value of a theory if say 99% behave rationally and 1% irrationally.

But obviously trying to predict the behaviour of humans is a lot more difficult than trying to predict the behaviour of nature.
People tend to think that economics is about inflation rate, unemployment and other techical terms that have nothing to do with humans.
Whereas it is just tries to predict the economic behaviour of humans.
It is also almost impossible to run experiments in economics to confirm a theory. You just have to take data under different conditions and under different times in history to prove a theory. Like raising taxes 20 years ago had that effect whereas raising taxes 10 years had a completely different effect.
And of course you have to condider that the x result might not be because of raising taxes but because of some other parameter change.

And also people's economic behaviour is not only effected about how are the current parameters (ie inflation, unemplyemt, tax rates etc) but how they expect these parameters to change in the future. Like what is happening in Europe now. The economic crisis is becoming bigger not just because people have lost their jobs or had a reduction on their income BUT also because people expect the situation to become worse they spend even less in order to have some saving for the worse times to come. It's a self-fulfiling cycle of gloom.
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1398
  • Posts: 23604
October 18th, 2012 at 7:32:18 AM permalink
Sounds interesting and educational. I decline to be a judge but will certainly follow the action.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 228
  • Posts: 12528
October 18th, 2012 at 7:35:38 AM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

You do realize economics isn't really a science. You can
put 10 economists in a room and they might not agree
on anything. Economic theories can't be proven, its
all speculation.



You never heard it called "The Dismal Science?"
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
Scotty71
Scotty71
Joined: Mar 5, 2011
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 289
October 18th, 2012 at 9:34:51 AM permalink
I would volunteer to be a judge. I hold a BS in History (Quant) and have been involved in the money business for 16 year. I am well read in the economic theory and market/credit cycles. I have bothFundamental and Technical course work in the CFA and CMT programs and stay current with global econ briefings from Goldman, Credit Suisse,Ned Davis, JP Morgan, BTIG, Northern Trust and the Conference Board.

I was on the HS debate team and understand judging a well supported argument regardless of whether it conflicts with my own opinions. I personally am not in full or even partial agreement with either of the "economic" schools of thought the combatant aligns with.

My only concern is time to read, review and respond to the debates at their conclusion...I would hope facts come from "trusted sources" using generally accepted public data ( a rant and a home made chart from zero-hedge doesn't hold water). How long are you giving judges to review the arguments and prepare responses?

FWIW economists have accurately predicted 22 of the last 15 recessions... like a broken watch... bound to be right twice a day.
when man determined to destroy himself he picked the was of shall and finding only why smashed it into because." — E.E. Cummings

  • Jump to: