Trio Share Economics Nobel Prize

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheTrueCentrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
We’ll see if this Nobel Prize winner has as much success as Obama has had achieving Peace!
 
A_Fortiori_33 said:
Pretty sad state of affairs. I wonder if the Republicans know as much about ecomonics as they do about science.
Click to expand...
They certainly managed to read the chapter on the benefits of trade and market equilibrium much more throughly than most democrats.
In fact, if they could only learn about externalities and said concept relates to pollution they’d be pretty solid.
 
From the article:

“Three academics who developed groundbreaking ideas that help explain why unemployment remains stubbornly high in the U.S. and other developed countries won this year’s Nobel Prize in economics.”

Oh yes, and Mr. Diamond recommends more stimulus spending in order to encourage employment. :rolleyes:

It might be that his appointment is being opposed because he’s touting a failed theory, Nobel or no Nobel. Barack Obama, after all, even admitted that he had done nothing to actually merit the Nobel prize himself.

It amazes me that these academics twirl and dance and theorize and actually get lionized for missing what every small businessman in America knows. You don’t invest in people or anything else in the face of uncertainty about what a radical government is going to do next, and clear governmental hostility to what you’re trying to do.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It might be that his appointment is being opposed because he’s touting a failed theory, Nobel or no Nobel.
Click to expand...
I am not sure that we have any senators of either part who really know enough about economics to be able to tell a failed theory from a valid one. Our government legislators have a huge amount of economic ignorance.
 
Ridgerunner said:
From the article:

“Three academics who developed groundbreaking ideas that help explain why unemployment remains stubbornly high in the U.S. and other developed countries won this year’s Nobel Prize in economics.”

Oh yes, and Mr. Diamond recommends more stimulus spending in order to encourage employment. :rolleyes:

It might be that his appointment is being opposed because he’s touting a failed theory, Nobel or no Nobel. Barack Obama, after all, even admitted that he had done nothing to actually merit the Nobel prize himself.

It amazes me that these academics twirl and dance and theorize and actually get lionized for missing what every small businessman in America knows. You don’t invest in people or anything else in the face of uncertainty about what a radical government is going to do next, and clear governmental hostility to what you’re trying to do.
Click to expand...
So they give it to another group of Keynesians. Perfect…because Keynesianism is working so well. 👍
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I am not sure that we have any senators of either part who really know enough about economics to be able to tell a failed theory from a valid one. Our government legislators have a huge amount of economic ignorance.
Click to expand...
Evidently so. Possibly, however, they could go up and down the street in any town in which there is business and industry and ask: “Why aren’t you hiring anybody?” The answers would be:

-“I don’t know what my taxes will be, so I can’t plan a budget.”
-“I don’t know if they’re going to pass Cap and Trade and make my power and transportation costs go up, so I can’t plan a budget.”
-" I don’t know what my employee healthcare plan is going to cost or whether I can even afford one, so I can’t plan a budget."
-“With all the government spending, I can’t predict what my interest rates on borrowed money would be in the next few years, so I can’t plan a budget.”
-“Seeing how the government is going to make me collect taxpayer information and file 1099s on every vendor I have (I have hundreds, you see) I am not sure how many people I’m going to have to hire just to take care of that, so I can’t plan a budget.”
-“Seeing how the government did that 1099 thing, and in a healthcare bill to boot, I can’t even imagine what other burdens they’re going to impose on me in the near future, so I can’t plan a budget.”
-“Since I can’t plan for the future because of such things, I don’t want to take the risk of hiring anybody. In fact, if somebody quits, I’ll first see if I can do without them before replacing them.”

Then, they could go to the banks in that town and ask why they’re not lending. The answers would be:

-“Because nobody wants to borrow. I take business people to lunch every week and practically beg them to borrow in order to expand, buy equipment, open new facilities, etc. They’re happy to eat the lunch, but they still won’t borrow any money.”
-“Because the government regulators make me put up loss reserves for loans now on my books where the borrower pays regularly, has a good business, who has a good history and has plenty of collateral, all for reasons that make no sense whatever. That, of course, limits my ability to take on any loan that isn’t absolutely perfect in THEIR view of things. Of course, none of them has ever run a bank.”

The legislators don’t need to read a bunch of economic theorizing. All the legislators really need to do in order to understand the unemployment problem is to use up some shoe leather out on the street.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I am not sure that we have any senators of either part who really know enough about economics to be able to tell a failed theory from a valid one. Our government legislators have a huge amount of economic ignorance.
Click to expand...
After watching Dick Armey school Joseph Stiglitz this morning I could only wish he was the incoming majority leader of the House. Stiglitz (also a Nobel Prize winner in economics) nearly choked when Armey carefully explain to him how Keynesian theory was supposed to work when Stiglitz claimed more “stimulus” would help the US economy.
 
Just what we need more spending money we don’t have…Brilliant.

:eek:
 
stevegravy said:
Just what we need more spending money we don’t have…Brilliant.

:eek:
Click to expand...
IMoney we don’t have? Bernanke is already talking about a second round of quantitative easing (turning the printing press back on full steam).
 
SamH said:
After watching Dick Armey school Joseph Stiglitz this morning I could only wish he was the incoming majority leader of the House. Stiglitz (also a Nobel Prize winner in economics) nearly choked when Armey carefully explain to him how Keynesian theory was supposed to work when Stiglitz claimed more “stimulus” would help the US economy.
Click to expand...
Can you link us to that video, it would be interesting.
 
SamH said:
After watching Dick Armey school Joseph Stiglitz this morning I could only wish he was the incoming majority leader of the House. Stiglitz (also a Nobel Prize winner in economics) nearly choked when Armey carefully explain to him how Keynesian theory was supposed to work when Stiglitz claimed more “stimulus” would help the US economy.
Click to expand...
Just a note: I also watched that video on CNBC. Joe was not choking. He was trying to respond to Dick Armey, but Armey kept talking, so Joe had to keep cutting himself off while waiting for Armey to finish. Everyone else in that video made their point briefly and then yielded so that Joe could respond (it was a segment about Joe’s book, afterall, so common courtesy would seem to dictate that Joe would do the majority of the talking). Armey just kept going on and on, so I can understand why Joe expected to be able to offer his opinion sooner than he was actually able to do so.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
Why didn’t you win the Nobel Prize? Actually its fairly obvious; that statement severely oversimplifies the economy.
Click to expand...
Economy aint that hard
  1. Make a product or offer a service somebody else will give you money for
  2. Do it for less than that somebody in step 1 will pay for it
  3. Do it often enough and you make enough profit to be richer than Bill Gates
  4. Don’t follow step two and you go broke
  5. Code: 
             Don't do step one and collect unemployment forever
All that stuff about supply and demand, utility and elasticity is all a bunch of complicating detail so brainiacs can argue
 
stevegravy said:
Economy aint that hard
  1. Make a product or offer a service somebody else will give you money for
  2. Do it for less than that somebody in step 1 will pay for it
  3. Do it often enough and you make enough profit to be richer than Bill Gates
  4. Don’t follow step two and you go broke
  5. Code: 
             Don't do step one and collect unemployment forever
All that stuff about supply and demand, utility and elasticity is all a bunch of complicating detail so brainiacs can argue
Click to expand...
That is like saying “chemistry ain’t that hard, electrons and atomic nuclei just try to minimize their potential energy.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top