rwer | The chicken that is fed by the farmer each morning may well have a
theory that it will always be fed each morning – it becomes a ‘law’. And
it works every day, until the day the chicken is instead slaughtered …
Now you might say that no chicken is an economist, but suppose that
chickens were as intelligent as the farmer who keeps them, so they could
be an economist … So if (the) chicken had been an economist, they
would not simply have observed that every morning the farmer brought
them food, and therefore concluded that this must happen forever.
Instead they would have asked a crucial additional question: why is the
farmer doing this? … And of course trying to answer that question might
have led them to the unfortunate truth …
You can see why the habit of introspection would make economists
predisposed to assume rationality generally, and rational expectations
in particular … It only works to use your own thought processes as a
guide to how people in general might behave, if you think other people
are essentially like yourself. So if your own thoughts lead you to
postulate some theory about how the economy behaves, then others similar
to yourself might be able to do something like the same thing …
Economists may also be fooled into thinking their introspection is
representative, because they are surrounded by other economists. So this
conjecture about introspection does little to show that assuming agents
have rational expectations is right (or wrong), but it may be one
reason why most economists find the concept of rational expectations so
attractive.
Following the greatest economic depression since the 1930s, the grand old man of modern economic growth theory, Nobel laureate Robert Solow,
on July 20, 2010, gave a prepared statement on “Building a Science of
Economics for the Real World” for a hearing in the U. S. Congress.
According to Solow modern macroeconomics has not only failed at solving
present economic and financial problems, but is “bound” to fail.
Building dynamically stochastic general equilibrium models (DSGE) on
“assuming the economy populated by a representative agent” – consisting
of “one single combination worker-owner-consumer-everything-else who
plans ahead carefully and lives forever” – do not pass “the smell test:
does this really make sense?” One cannot but concur in Solow’s surmise
that a thoughtful person “faced with the thought that economic policy
was being pursued on this basis, might reasonably wonder what planet he
or she is on.”
34 comments:
If economists were rational would they compute and report Demand Side Depreciation?
Economists are only rational to the extent that is serves the economic interests of economists. Consumers are supposed to be chickens.
Right up your alley:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/05/02/are-the-end-times-upon-us-author-says-unrestrained-immorality-mirrors-pandemic-godlessness-seen-in-the-bible/
Interesting all the manufactured pent-up catharsis. Just waiting to pop.
Have had that tab opened all morning, just haven't gotten around to reading it. Hypertiger say Judgemnet day nigh upon us...,
He's been saying that for a long time. He may be right, but as I often repeat, it's better to be wrong than early. Fish or cut bait, the $1,000,000 question.
Lift weights, jog miles, eat right, mold bullets and sharpen blades, everything else....., (play some tennis and blog too, of course)
SE Cupp's tv character has been full of shit since she signed on: http://youtu.be/2IvBWp9p7Do
What's up with CNN?
http://youtu.be/aFQFB5YpDZE
I think this should get the presstitution tag. Nye's a serious cat while the jerkoffs at the table with him are far from it. Their job isn't to be serious; it's to play games with the viewers. Climate change demands we make the kind of changes that put the Heritage fuckboy out on his ass at a minimum. Thankfully, people don't watch CNN.
I don't know who tagged Bill Nye as the all purpose cabbagehead/potatohead wrangler..., but he's playing his part and better him than me afaic.
As for the very lovely Ms. Cupp, surely you appreciate the fact that her entire schtick consists of channeling Dorothy Malone into a very odd and vague form of atheist log cabin "conservatism". She's edgy and smart and shit - with an extra 30 IQ points just from the glasses alone. http://youtu.be/Sqoxk3SrZRw
CNu:
Estimated Number Of Republicans In The World: 60 million
Estimated Number Of Chinese In The World: 1,300 million
QUESTION -
Do you see that sometimes STATISTICS can be used to draw one's self a "larger wienee" to make one feel good but use baseline numbers that MAKE NO DAMNED SENSE in a comparison?
Why is GLOBAL WARMING such a PARTISAN/IDEOLOGICAL SWORD.
IF we all are going to die from it then what we have are TWO DUNG PRODUCING PARTY ANIMALS from a nation of 320 million in a world of 6,600 million people WHO ARE FIGHTING FOR THE WHEEL OF THEIR VEHICLE as it goes off the side of the road - while THE ROAD is but a "slot-less electric race car track' - and the flat bed truck that that road is riding upon IS ALSO GOING OFF THE SIDE OF A CLIFF - so it doesn't matter WHO wins the fight in the smaller car.
NO?
I take my hat off to whoever made the call for Bill Nye to beat up on stupid. It's pretty annoying that cable news still plays that 'both sides' game.
I knew SE's character was a joke but seeing her inspiration makes me shake my head. Dorothy Malone knew how to use her sex energy. SE's game isn't that advanced. And she hasn't quite figured out how to pilfer those redneck dollars the way that Ann Coulter had. But she knows enough to work cable news.
Speaking of cable news, check out MSNBC's biggest dumbass: http://earthdesk.blogs.pace.edu/tag/joe-scarborough/.
Ecological footprint of China WITH its 1.3 Billion http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/trends/china/
Ecological footprint of the U.S. with its paltry 60 million wattles http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/trends/united_states_of_america/
QUESTION - do you ever bother to know wtf you're talking about before you commence to talking?
You make no damned sense. Go inform yourself and revisit the topic when you have command of real data instead of paid partisan parroting of ignorant polemical talking points.
Squatted 325 for 3 sets of 5 today, applied for CCW in my new county, buy coffee weekly for the neighborhood homeless near the office, give meaningful industry advice to people who can't help me. Blades are sharp, keep blogging. ;)
Dorothy Malone knew how to use her sex energy. SE's game isn't that advanced.
lol, I ain't say she was good at it, but it's the only game they've got right now and it's the game she's try'na play.
In the modern era, there's only one Libby Casey http://youtu.be/-qWZjgIIxRU - bringing the full Dorothy Malone.
One might argue that Lynne Russell occasionally donned glasses, but Lynne was channeling straight Maleficent and glasses couldn't tone down that Disney dominatrix who might genuinely kill you level of the game to a mere wholesome and mentally engaging sexy librarian.
Nice...., how far you go with the knee bends? I see these little elite wrestlers squat twice their body weight and go to dangerously deep levels of knee bend. Me, I'm just trying to make sure my core is solid and so I don't even try to get 90 degrees of bend. The battle against decrepitude is neverending. We've GOT to get those catch levels set on the useless young and let the transfusion games begin!
oh my...., it just now occurred to me that SE Cupp may genuinely be reaching no higher up the iconoclastic chain of avatars than Sarah Palin, eeeeeuuwww.....,
LOL. I take it just past parallel, it's "legal" depth in the strict powerlifting feds. Just did an amateur strongman contest two weeks ago. I've hit all my strength goals, now it's recovery and flexibility for the next few years while maintaining my mojo.
Libby's good. Lynne Russell's some other shit. Ted Turner wasn't playing back then.
Cupp sold out so we really shouldn't be expecting much. It doesn't seem like it bothers her. Oh well, welcome to America.
In overpopulated "developing" nations, we not only poopoo in public, we peepee in public too, because, yolo! http://youtu.be/aaEqZQXmx5M
More you say? Gladly:New Delhi’s air is the most polluted in the world, according to an international report that quantifies pollution levels, confirming findings by experts confounded by the lack of attention to the city’s problem.
The findings by the World Health Organization, released on Wednesday, show that the cities ranking second through fourth are also in India, in the central Hindi belt.
For years, experts have wondered why so much international attention has focused on air pollution in Beijing when some say conditions are as bad or even worse in South Asia.www.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/world/asia/cities-in-india-among-the-most-polluted-who-says.html
People in the U.S. who've only ever seen pictures harbor a lot of illusions about the exotic orient. There's nothing exotic about rural medieval backwardness cheek to jowl with American-style modernity. It just makes for a sprawling and nasty hot mess.
[quote]QUESTION - do you ever bother to know wtf you're talking about before you commence to talking?[/quote]
In your own words - Could you tell me how your two charts negate my comments above?
US "ecological footprint" = 7 per capita (multiplied times 316M) =2.012
China "ecological footprint" = 2 per capita (multiplied times 1,351M) = 2.702
MY CLAIM STANDS!!!!
The shear FACT that China's population is SO MUCH GREATER than the entire US population (and North America's at 534M) - It is IRRATIONAL for any chart to index the OPINIONS of "The nation of CHINA" with the opinions of ANY sub-population within the United States.
THE CHART THAT YOU HAVE POSTED PRESENTS SOURCE DATA THAT ARE NOT LOGICALLY COMPARABLE.
Tell me, CNu - what do the percentages in the chart that you have published represent? (I assume that it means the percentage of a GIVEN GROUPING OF PEOPLE believe that Climate change is a big deal).
If you are presenting a comparison of the INTENSITY of a belief - that's one point.
HOWEVER - if you make the case that such a group's "Non-Belief" allows them to continue living frivolously - then the chart is FRAUDULENT.
1) REGARDLESS of what you THINK - your respective national laws define the limits on your fossil fuel consumption. I "denier" has no more "rights" in the USA as a "believer in man made global warming"
2) You can't find a significant difference in energy consumption within the USA between the battling ideologies. At this point it is being used as a political bludgeon on both sides
3) Failing to ask people "Now that you believe in Global Warming - what would you preemptively give up" and then tell them "We are going to TAKE AWAY certain creature comforts from you right now - in order to reduce your carbon footprint" - at this point does THEORY become REALITY - and the numbers would shift.
The GOP's intense disbelief make climate treaties impossible. They need 66 votes and they can only get a little over 50 at best. They were elected to do that. All the article is saying is that republicans on the ground are holding the country back.
The environment used to be something both parties believed in. Nixon helped start the EPA. And John McCain took climate change seriously when he ran for president. Obama's election caused the stupid party to lose their damn minds.
lol, Feed...,
Here's what I commented to JK about China yesterday afternoon http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2014/05/confusing-right-to-be-heard-with-right.html#comment-1377195802
Now, if that's my killer-ape geostrategic realism about the Han, and what they represent to the long-term prospects for me and mine (afro-saxon) - what in the world do you think I think about the wattles http://youtu.be/IFyZOO4Bezg
When in doubt about triangulating my political orientation, use the following rule of thumb. William F. Buckley was the exemplary public face of conservatism on which I imprinted. What would Buckley say about the wattles? What did Buckley say about the wattles - and how did he purge these imbeciles from the governing echelons of conservatism on three separate occasions.
Now, the fact that the Koch Brothers have labored long and hard (John Birch society purged by Buckley from the ranks of legitimate and acceptable conservatism) have rallied your inexcusable dixiecrat wattles and welded them into a force that will have to be harshly reckoned with, well, that's simply unfortunate.
The fact that these self-same wattles (60 million or so) are subject to the exact same kind of appeals that the current Han mandarins have used (infinite and wholly unsustainable economic growth) to maintain governance over their herd of a billion plus - should I have any more sympathy or regard for them than I do for the North Korean elites showing their asses and the true face of their polity calling Obama a "wicked black monkey"?
Now don't trivialize what I'm trying to impart to you by pretending that I'm feeling "a certain type of way" about Obama being called something other than a "child of god". I don't role like that, and if you even fix your mouth to pretend that I do, then I'm done with you once and for all - because the truth is simply not capable of being in you. No, what I'm on about here is that both the North Korean nutty elites and the Han mandarins are genuine racist totalitarian fascists in the classic Nazi mold, and when push comes to shove (and that moment is getting closer every day) that's how they're going to role on a massive scale.
These are existential enemies. I'm not about to learn chinese, and straight-up phuk korean.
I think we've wasted more than enough time not dealing with them harshly, in fact, as an historical counterfactual, I often wonder how different the current world order would be had Douglas MacArthur been permitted to continue to run rampant by Truman http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2010/05/why-did-truman-really-fire-macarthur.html
I'm long past the feminized futility of moral arguments Feed. So those all fall on deaf ears too. The U.S. is absolutely soaked in sin, but it's the devil I know and it's the devil I'll defend - though more on the Chomskian side of the debate than on the Bucklian side of the debate. http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2014/05/white-privilege-as-neutron-bomb-of.html
As a practical matter, a polity that is being governed on the basis of false promises of unattainable continuing growth is indistiguishable from a polity which sincerely believes in the myth of unattainable continuing growth. The exponential function on/in a finite world IS the definition of hell. http://youtu.be/KdsbuJfMpr0
It sucks that too many Americans like being lied to so much. I hope Jimmy Carter wasn't the last honest leader. It'll take some skill to convince the middle class that the gig is up.
A long time ago, I came to the realization that "our polity is our way of life" and its corollary that "our way of life is non-negotiable".
Having accepted these baselines freed me from any number of utterly irrelevant moral and political considerations, as well as, leading me to the certain and clear understanding that "our unsustainable way of life" is nearly universally coveted. So, having accepted those parameters as defining the meaningful limits of consensus reality - not the objective limits mind you - but the ones over which billions would fight/die during my lifetime. Everything else simply and directly minimized to entertaining conversation.
Do i want to share this killer-ape polity with Cleetus and Bubba, not so much, but, they're the devils i know. Sharing with WuChan and Rojit
Of we agree it sucks Americans are being lied to..
http://spectator.org/articles/59090/brass-balls-and-climate-change
correction "of course we agree"
lol, the very epitome of boko..., 2160 words signifying nothing. Sums up rather nicely the return on Koch brothers' billion dollar investment in trying to derail American politics - when absolutely all they've got left is Lois Lerner and Benghazi.
That whole interminable whine could've been simply boiled down to this: But when it comes to using energy to better our lives, we must be stopped.
Yes, you must be stopped. Bottomline, the wattles have nothing of value to contribute to the future. Prolonging their peasant consumption won't yield any profit - and - demonstrably contributes to the potentially irreversible deterioration of the biosphere.
Someone in the media gets it on debating climate change.
The video is BS... not just kidding I'll give you a little more refuting of what some consider strong facts than some do...
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/about-that-overwhelming-98-number-of-scientists-consensus/
The mantra of consensus is hollow.
I hope you get paid for this shit. I'd hate to think you sincerely believe what you're saying. If you're honest, I can't talk you out of running into that brick wall.
LOL, what a twisted response that does not solve a problem except establish schadenfreude..I fuggin love it!!!!
I am not sure I follow, "believe what you are saying", the most integral part of your video and central argument to humans causing catastrophic global warming is the proclaimed scientific consensus. Someone pulls the actual numbers and questions of one of the surveys and shows us the actual numbers, what is not to believe? I have not seen any refuting here or counter arguments of surveys or the facts presented from the article you called BS. I'll post another analysis of the surveys from a position of the right, and then this should give you the names so you can search them and counter the claims and show their legitimacy.
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/97_Consensus_Myth.pdf
I'm saying that you are hard headed. The right wing freak show has no legitimacy. I have too much contempt for them to bother debating their points. The video I posted is a reflection of that contempt. Climate change denial is no longer a legitimate position(hasn't been for a while). Your failure to accept that is kind of funny. You aren't acting in good faith.
Post a Comment