Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Arraya
ParticipantThe big question is why did academics fail at forecasting this? THAT is the question and how that applies to society overall?
Participant[quote=briansd1]Arraya, maybe the nation-state needs to be abolished along with capitalism.
[/quote]
Karl Polyani showed in his magnum opus, The Great Transformation(which is still famous book in the social sciences even though it was published in the early 40s) , that the nation state is a capitalist structure. Meaning the nation-state came into existence as a necessity of capitalism.
I think, as I’ve stated before in many ways, that we are at the tail end of global capitalism and starting a transition to a new system much like the industrial revolution was a transition away from feudalism, but in a much shorter time period. I think the dissolution of capitalism and the nation-state is inevitable.
for fun, do a google news search on any given day of “police clash with protesters”. The size and frequency of protesting and rioting has been increasing steadily since 2008(ok I have problems, I monitor global unrest with google;).
.
Participant[quote=KSMountain]
So what’s your answer to my question?I’m interested in your answer.[/quote]
I assume you mean in arraya’s ideal post-capitalist collapse world?
I’m not sure. We certainly have to think about the material demands of long distance travel and transport. Though, you certainly would have much more time to travel;)
We ship fish from Canada to China to be cleaned – then back to the US to be consumed. For some reason, economic sense is at odds with the real world.
But, the short answer is, no, money demand and power would be no more.
Participantpri – when I say “modern economics”, I mean neoclassical. Which would be market theorists since the early 1800 century. Early capitalism(classical economics) was called the study of the “political economy” or “liberalism”.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
I think Austrians use data in a different way. They read history and looks at trends through history to make conclusions. There have been thousands of governments and currencies in the history of man-kind and you can pull infinite empirical data from that. The data is much different than the other Keynes data, but also MUCH more accurate. They use more accurate empirical data than the rest.[/quote]
Dude, you don’t even understand Austrian economics and their complaints with monetarists and modern day economic modeling. You’re just spouting laissez-faire talking points – which is not Austrian economics, though, Austrian economists tend to be laissez fair as well.
Participant[quote=markmax33]
We don’t have capitalism! You have been duped! It’s a rigged system that leans much further toward socialism/corporatism than capitalism.[/quote]
Right, we never have and never will according to your definitions. It will always be something else.
ParticipantScience is a process of formulating models that predict outcomes in a natural system under certain conditions, and then testing them to see if the future predictions agree. However, the goal is to find how the model is inadequately representing the natural system. When the model is refuted, it is adjusted to form a new model from what is learned about the system. Since there is an underlying system that is being approximated by the models, there is an “objective reality” (exists independently of human conceptualization) to be described by conceptual models. The models evolve representations of the relationships and features that are defined by the system. Models are useful to humans. Models are respected when they better reflect the nature of the system.
Economics is an artifact of human imagination and all human conceptualization, and the agreement among certain humans who “play the games” together — thereby it is a social technology. There is no underlying physical reality other than what is identified by the players to be components. Nevertheless, the economic properties are determined by and limited only by the beliefs of the “players.” To build economic models one must assume certain features, and the models become part of the generators of the results. Since they are not inherently tied to the physical and biological realities(no physical referent), they may fail arbitrarily as the physical and biological world view of humans change — or as people believe the physical and biological world exists.
Economics in large part reflects human belief systems. Modern economics does not exist if we collectively don’t believe it. You can’t say the same about thermodynamics.
Participant[quote=KSMountain][quote=KSMountain][quote=Arraya]We don’t NEED money to cast an arm or make a computer – these are technical processes.[/quote]
A new chip plant costs about $2 Billion. Takes many years to build, has a lot of real estate, power, and specialized gas needs. You need a fully intact supply chain, financial system, and legal infrastructure to make a microchip.Hope you don’t spill coffee on your computer…[/quote]
Make that $5B.You know what it takes to make a computer? Capital. And capitalists. Sorry.[/quote]
Again, the purely subjective price point has nothing to do with the physical resources and- labor/knowledge in building a chip plant. Now, it is supposed to represent the aggregate “value” of those things measured in our currency de jour, but, it is not those things. It’s a concept.
Participant[quote=pri_dk]Down with capitalism!
– Sent from my iPhone[/quote]
Hmmm.. we could make an Iphone without capitalism – though it would be pretty hard without science. The (purely subjective and human contrived) rules of money have nothing in common with the rules of energy and matter.
Participant[quote=pri_dk][quote=markmax33][quote=pri_dk][quote=markmax33]We have empirical data that shows […][/quote]
Real Austrian economists don’t use empirical data.[/quote]
Okay explain that one please. I’m dying to hear it.[/quote]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_economics
Methodology is where Austrian economists differ most significantly from other schools of economic thought. Mainstream schools such as Keynesians and Monetarists adopt empirical, mathematical, and statistical methods, and focus on induction to construct and test theories. Austrian economists reject empirical statistical methods […]
You got a long way to go, my friend.
Perhaps you should start your journey by asking your scientist parents what falsifiable means.[/quote]
In Austrians defense – they don’t like the econometrics that mainstream economists use. Which they are correct, IMO. Econometrics is monetarists way of trying to make economics more science-y.
This quote from an anti-capitalist that, I believe, sums up how Austrians feel abut econometrics
Economics is largely a self-fulfilling psychology. It effectively constructs a model of behaviour, to a model for behaviour; whereby such models educate us to think how we’re ‘supposed’ to think. As a result, this pseudo-science has maintained a heavy reliance upon seeking numerical legitimacy and mathematical reassurance for justifying assumptions of rationality.
Participant[quote=briansd1]
I wonder, if Ron Paul, when elected president will legalize drugs and prostitution first. Or will he end the Fed first?[/quote]
Ironically, if RP enacted his policies – global capitalism would collapse in short order.
Participant[quote=KSMountain]Arraya,
If you got your global economic collapse, would I still be able to fly in a jet airplane to Europe? Having some nice wine available on the flight would be nice too.
If not – count me out![/quote]
Whether society goes down over several decades of decay punctuated by interment crises or a few successive catastrophic financial collapses within a few years – it’s going down. We are going to have to reorganize based on new rules or have a severely and increasingly dysfunctional society.
Participant[quote=markmax33
Not a single Keynesian economist predicted it but ALL of the Austrian economists did. I don’t care about your prediction that appears to be somewhere in the middle. I’m talking about the major schools of philosophy. How many times do the Austrians have to predict things, explain why they are about to happen and then have the exact thing happen they predicted until you will listen to them? Please give me a number![/quote]
Mainstream economists will never see problems. It’s the nature of economics. They are there to make excuses for the ruling class.
Participant[quote=briansd1][quote=Arraya] I want to see the global economy collapse. [/quote]
I can understand your wanting that.
But how would life be better in the aftermath of a collapse? Can you please explain what an economic collapse would achieve?[/quote]
What is collapsing? A set of arrangements. Not our resource base(though we are doing a good job in certain areas) or technical know-how to take care of human needs. We don’t NEED money to deliver and grow food. We don’t NEED money to cast an arm or make a computer – these are technical processes.
-
AuthorPosts
