Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 60

Thread: Do you fully understand and know Economics?

  1. #26
    Member Wulf9's avatar
    Registered
    May 2003
    Location
    Near the Geysers
    Posts
    922
    Four rules

    Supply and demand always come to equilibrium.

    When you muck with supply or demand, things still come to equilibrium, but the economy gets a bit less productive for each intrusion.

    If you muck too much, the economy gets a lot less productive.

    "Mucking" usually takes the form of granting subsidies or allowing monopoly.

    Oh, and rule five. Economics is truly heartless unless you do some mucking about to provide a degree of social justice.

  2. #27
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    I guess I'm the only psoter at this poitn that actually ameks a living from economics?

    jordanb sez: "Economics is a very contentious field where not much is "known" indisputably."

    I'll go along with the 'contentious'. However, on much of the basic, everyday stuff (such as a planner may need to know )there is a broad consensus.

    Jaws sez: "did an honours undergrad in economics and I can honestly say that I learned absolutely nothing about economics in my classes. What I did learn was from reading books, and it never really started to make sense as a system until I read Ludwig von Mises. Even Milton Friedman is unconvincing.

    Mainstream economics today is just an excuse to make work for professors. There's absolutely no way to determine whether anything they say is true or not if you follow their epistemology."

    WHERE did you go to school, Jaws?
    I mean, it's true that 75% of udnergrad econ seems to be a textbook and prof. papers circle-jerk but there ae some very good economsits out there, especially on the historical side. (One of them's running yer central bank now).
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  3. #28
    Cyburbian abrowne's avatar
    Registered
    Jan 2005
    Location
    BC
    Posts
    1,584
    I took an introductory macroeconomics class and was horrified with the level (or lack thereof) of academic rigour. All sorts of ideas were thrown around as truths without any justification of any kind. An absolute circus.

    I suspect that microeconomics might be a tad more grounded, on the whole. But even here there are battling psychological motivators driving these microeconomic exchanges.

    Quote Originally posted by Budgie View post
    Anyone know what a util is?

    How about MR - MC = 0 = MP?
    Marginal Revenue - Marginal Cost = 0 = Marginal Product

    I'm reaching back...?

  4. #29
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    I mean, it's true that 75% of udnergrad econ seems to be a textbook and prof. papers circle-jerk but there ae some very good economsits out there, especially on the historical side. (One of them's running yer central bank now).
    The other 25% is econometrics which has nothing to do with economics and should just be called statistical regression analysis.

    As for David Dodge, a man who claims that Canadians have a problem with excessive savings is on crack, or is a paid liar (which the vast majority of economists are). Since he's running the central bank, I'll add the title of professional thief to his job description.

  5. #30
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by abrowne View post
    ...I suspect that microeconomics might be a tad more grounded, on the whole. ....
    You suspect wrong...at least at the academic/textbook level.

    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    The other 25% is econometrics which has nothing to do with economics and should just be called statistical regression analysis.

    As for David Dodge, a man who claims that Canadians have a problem with excessive savings is on crack, or is a paid liar (which the vast majority of economists are). Since he's running the central bank, I'll add the title of professional thief to his job description.
    I done forgot you're a Canuckistani! I was talking about Ben 'da man' Bernanke, not David 'get the hell outta' Dodge.

    I'm not even going to begin to ask why you think central bankers are 'thieves'. You crack me up Jaws, the best troll a site ever had
    Last edited by NHPlanner; 25 Aug 2006 at 2:07 PM.
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  6. #31
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    I done forgot you're a Canuckistani! I was talking about Ben 'da man' Bernanke, not David 'get the hell outta' Dodge.

    I'm not even going to begin to ask why you think central bankers are 'thieves'. You crack me up Jaws, the best troll a site ever had
    Central Banking is a scheme to steal from the poor and give to the rich. How do you think the City got so rich? "Allocating capital efficiently"? Come on.

  7. #32
    Cyburbian Budgie's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Sans Souci
    Posts
    5,265
    Quote Originally posted by abrowne View post
    Marginal Revenue - Marginal Cost = 0 = Marginal Product
    Very very close -- the MP stands for maximum profit. when the marginal cost of the next widget exceeds the marginal revenue of the that widget, you've hit the greatest amount of profit. Basically you want to produce at a level where MR = MC. However, very few businesses run this way because of something businesses chase after called "market share". Also the MR = MC is an application that is more meaningful to manufacturers.

    I actually like delving into the true nature of economics on a social, spiritual, political and financial sense. Meaning the study of people acting in "rational self interest" in all matters. However, I would like to reframe this discussion in terms of peoples "irrational self interest". One of the key factors to all economic decisions on all levels is the availability and quality of information needed to make a choice. blah, blah, blah, blah....

    I really need to get back to work.
    "And all this terrible change had come about because he had ceased to believe himself and had taken to believing others. " - Leo Tolstoy

  8. #33
    Chairman of the bored Maister's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2004
    Location
    on my 15 minute break
    Posts
    19,480
    Quote Originally posted by Budgie View post
    I actually like delving into the true nature of economics on a social, spiritual, political and financial sense. Meaning the study of people acting in "rational self interest" in all matters.
    Economics in a spiritual sense...now that is a thought provoking idea. There must necessarily be a spiritual aspect of economics too. How somehow views the function/role of economics and/or subsistance probably says a great deal about their spiritual convictions.
    People will miss that it once meant something to be Southern or Midwestern. It doesn't mean much now, except for the climate. The question, “Where are you from?” doesn't lead to anything odd or interesting. They live somewhere near a Gap store, and what else do you need to know? - Garrison Keillor

  9. #34
    Cyburbian Budgie's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Sans Souci
    Posts
    5,265
    Quote Originally posted by Maister View post
    Economics in a spiritual sense...now that is a thought provoking idea. There must necessarily be a spiritual aspect of economics too. How somehow views the function/role of economics and/or subsistance probably says a great deal about their spiritual convictions.
    The essence of all economics is the basic unit of a human trying to fulfill his/her needs. When choices are made to meet those needs, people are said to be acting in rational self interest. The basic needs of a human are shelter, food, water, clothing, etc... spiritual and emotional nourishment is right up there with the others basic human needs or at least a close second tier need. When resources are scarce choices are made into which of these needs to invest. Some people find more utility (utils) through emotional investment, while others find it in material investment. This isn't only a question of money... value earned from past work... is only one resource... time, effort, thought, etc... are all resources to be a invested in what a specific individual needs to reach fulfillment.

    blah, blah, blah.... I must stop NOW !!!!
    "And all this terrible change had come about because he had ceased to believe himself and had taken to believing others. " - Leo Tolstoy

  10. #35
         
    Registered
    May 2006
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    160
    My very hope and plan in life is to go into Planning and whatnot soley with an Economics Bachelor

  11. #36
    Cyburbian boiker's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Valley, AZ
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally posted by Budgie View post
    Yes, I understand economics in a wide variety of it's applications.

    Please don't make me reply to this thread.... I won't know when to stop.
    I know economics, but I don't know it. I mean, we've never even talked much.

    All I know about econimcs is that it is much like the weather. We know enough about it to say it exists, that it effects our daily lives and sometimes it gets pretty rough.
    Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.

  12. #37
    Super Moderator luckless pedestrian's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2005
    Location
    in a meeting
    Posts
    8,964

    The only A's I got were in economics and management, so what does that say?

    what is this economics of which you speak?

  13. #38
    Quote Originally posted by Budgie View post
    Very very close -- the MP stands for maximum profit. when the marginal cost of the next widget exceeds the marginal revenue of the that widget, you've hit the greatest amount of profit. Basically you want to produce at a level where MR = MC. However, very few businesses run this way because of something businesses chase after called "market share". Also the MR = MC is an application that is more meaningful to manufacturers.
    All that it says is that it makes no sense to take on an additional cost that brings in less than the equivalent additional revenue. It is just plain common sense, and is applied by everyone.

  14. #39
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    Central Banking is a scheme to steal from the poor and give to the rich. How do you think the City got so rich? "Allocating capital efficiently"? Come on.
    The post you link to is so economically and logically illiterate it's actually funny. I think I'll send it around to soem friends .

    Yes Jaws., the city is rich because Jooz eat babies, banks steal money from depositors and central banks steal money through inflation.

    Saty off the drugs man, that sort of ranting is the Web at its worst.
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  15. #40
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    The post you link to is so economically and logically illiterate it's actually funny. I think I'll send it around to soem friends .

    Yes Jaws., the city is rich because Jooz eat babies, banks steal money from depositors and central banks steal money through inflation.

    Saty off the drugs man, that sort of ranting is the Web at its worst.
    The best you can offer is a claim that it's a crackpot theory without justifying yourself. Nobody said anything about jews, and that central bank steal money through inflation is a well recognized fact. (Though most just call it stealth taxation.) You're not even pretending to be innocent. What are people supposed to believe?

    Just admit it. It's a great scam and you got in on it before the rest of us bums could. Gloat a little.
    Last edited by jaws; 24 Aug 2006 at 3:30 AM.

  16. #41

    Registered
    May 1997
    Location
    Williston, VT
    Posts
    1,371
    After being steeped in anthropology, ecology, and psychology, I found that I needed two courses in Econ to get into my grad program. So I challenged for them. I passed Macro that way, but missed Micro by 1 point. Aggh! So I had to take it during my last semester as an undergrad. By the third session I realized that I had gone from a world in which facts mattered to a world in which empirical observations were simply not welcome. It was an ideological indoctrination, not a college class. I did get into some interesting stuff in grad school dealing with public finance and utility economics..Since then I have worked with numerous economists in various contexts and found even very intelligent people to be amazingly obtuse. It is the only academic discipline in which theory comes before the facts and which has developed concepts that are solely for explaining away inconvenient facts in the most delusional manner.

  17. #42
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    The best you can offer is a claim that it's a crackpot theory without justifying yourself. Nobody said anything about jews, and that central bank steal money through inflation is a well recognized fact. (Though most just call it stealth taxation.) You're not even pretending to be innocent. What are people supposed to believe?

    Just admit it. It's a great scam and you got in on it before the rest of us bums could. Gloat a little.
    No, I could pick it apart but:
    a) you've always shown yourself to be utterly resistant to accepting any evidence/hypothesis that does not confirm your pre-existing opinion; and
    b) there are better things to do than refute every flat-earther theory out there.

    I ain't biting
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  18. #43
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    No, I could pick it apart but:
    a) you've always shown yourself to be utterly resistant to accepting any evidence/hypothesis that does not confirm your pre-existing opinion; and
    b) there are better things to do than refute every flat-earther theory out there.

    I ain't biting
    How is it a flat earth theory to point out that finance is the most subsidized industry in the world? No one blinks an eye when they hear about farm subsidies going to corporate farms.

    Come on, you're the ultimate welfare queen. Matthew Lesko with a high-fashion suit.

    Quote Originally posted by Lee Nellis View post
    After being steeped in anthropology, ecology, and psychology, I found that I needed two courses in Econ to get into my grad program. So I challenged for them. I passed Macro that way, but missed Micro by 1 point. Aggh! So I had to take it during my last semester as an undergrad. By the third session I realized that I had gone from a world in which facts mattered to a world in which empirical observations were simply not welcome. It was an ideological indoctrination, not a college class. I did get into some interesting stuff in grad school dealing with public finance and utility economics..Since then I have worked with numerous economists in various contexts and found even very intelligent people to be amazingly obtuse. It is the only academic discipline in which theory comes before the facts and which has developed concepts that are solely for explaining away inconvenient facts in the most delusional manner.
    Economics is a formal science, like mathematics and logic. It must come before facts because facts cannot be interpreted in any meaningful way without it.

  19. #44
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    How is it a flat earth theory to point out that finance is the
    most subsidized industry in the world?
    What subsidies?

    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    Come on, you're the ultimate welfare queen. Matthew Lesko with a high-fashion suit.
    I'm wearing 'chinos' today. And I probably pay more money in taxes every year than you earn in a decade

    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    Economics is a formal science, like mathematics and logic. It must come before facts because facts cannot be interpreted in any meaningful way without it.
    It depends on how you define 'facts'. If you beleive that x+y = y+x is a 'fact', that fact is the beginnign of math, on which you then elaborate more complex factual relationships. I think you've misread your K. Popper.
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  20. #45
    BANNED
    Registered
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    194

    What?

    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    In real life I work in finance...
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    I guess I'm the only psoter at this poitn that actually ameks a living from economics?

    jordanb sez: "Economics is a very contentious field where not much is "known" indisputably."

    I'll go along with the 'contentious'. However, on much of the basic, everyday stuff (such as a planner may need to know )there is a broad consensus.

    Jaws sez: "did an honours undergrad in economics and I can honestly say that I learned absolutely nothing about economics in my classes. What I did learn was from reading books, and it never really started to make sense as a system until I read Ludwig von Mises. Even Milton Friedman is unconvincing.

    Mainstream economics today is just an excuse to make work for professors. There's absolutely no way to determine whether anything they say is true or not if you follow their epistemology."

    WHERE did you go to school, Jaws?
    I mean, it's true that 75% of udnergrad econ seems to be a textbook and prof. papers circle-jerk but there ae some very good economsits out there, especially on the historical side. (One of them's running yer central bank now).
    Apparently you do not know the difference between economics and finance. I guess you mean you sell stocks and bonds as, or for, an investment banker – so your vested interest would be in the money market. Obviously in the field of finance there would be a definite bias for the notion that money is capital. You would maintain the, "If you’re so smart why aren’t you rich" mentality. Why not rather say, if you're so rich why aren't you smart?

    I thought what the thread was about is basic economics, Your apparent notion that money is capital prompts me to elaborate on my previous post.

    Would you agree that Capital is the controlling factor in the production of wealth? Then should the controlling factor be money or intelligence? The best economy (which is concerned with the allocation of scarce resources) would be one in which there is the least amount of waste of resources as well as the greatest amount of production of goods and services - the least waste with the greatest abundance. Then, in view of the great amount of waste in our money minded economy, you must see that money is neither intelligence nor capital. Money is entirely on the other side of the equation – it is a measure of Wealth.

    Concerning the role of economics in planning, I would think the land factor would be the planner's primary concern - land use, conservation of nature and natural resources, etc. Planners do well in that regard, often in conflict with the big money boys of your ilk. In terms of Land, Labor and Capital I see a comparison with mass, energy and light (in terms of physics); so, planners would also be concerned with energy and its proper use and conservation. Not to mention that as knowledge workers they must be concerned with the proper use and conservation of their intelligence – use it or lose it - more than as just a way to make a living.

    FRB

    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    ...there ae some very good economsits out there, especially on the historical side. (One of them's running yer central bank now) .
    His predecessor, Alan Greenspan was a disciple of Ayn Rand who revered honesty and integrity. They are only concerned with monetary and fiscal policy, mainly the regulation of the money supply which is the Economics of Money and Banking - dealing with problems of inflation and unemployment. They do have a department of Community Development for whatever that may be worth.
    Last edited by bud; 25 Aug 2006 at 12:14 PM. Reason: additional matter

  21. #46
    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    What subsidies?
    Said trillions of dollars of below-market loans that the central bank hands over to the banks to "stimulate the economy".

    Quote Originally posted by Luca View post
    I'm wearing 'chinos' today. And I probably pay more money in taxes every year than you earn in a decade
    Subsidized industries don't pay taxes, they consume taxes. You're probably right that you consume more in taxes than I will have to pay in a decade (and we pay A LOT of taxes here), but I like making an honest living.
    Last edited by jaws; 25 Aug 2006 at 2:18 PM.

  22. #47
    Cyburbian boiker's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2001
    Location
    West Valley, AZ
    Posts
    3,895
    http://money.cnn.com/2006/09/25/maga...ion=2006092607

    I mentioned, purely on conjecture, that Africa could be one of the next "boom" economies. Seems that the difficulties in Africa may be clearing enough to bring on capitalism.

    Edit:: Completely wrong thread. sorry
    Last edited by boiker; 26 Sep 2006 at 2:26 PM. Reason: Bonehead
    Dude, I'm cheesing so hard right now.

  23. #48
    Cyburbian DetroitPlanner's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Where the weak are killed and eaten.
    Posts
    6,247
    Iknow all about economics. For example, gas prices are down because the republicans want to win as many seats as possible. It has nothing to do with a decrease in demand as a result of higher prices!
    We hope for better things; it will arise from the ashes - Fr Gabriel Richard 1805

  24. #49
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by jaws View post
    Said trillions of dollars of below-market loans that the central bank hands over to the banks to "stimulate the economy".
    This is actually becoming funny. What loans would those be? (let's take the case of the US economy and banking system just for the sake of exposition - most posters here are Merrykuns, ok?).
    Life and death of great pattern languages

  25. #50
    Cyburbian Luca's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally posted by bud View post
    Apparently you do not know the difference between economics and finance. I guess you mean you sell stocks and bonds as, or for, an investment banker
    You seem to confalte knowledge of economics as agreeing with your bizarre, left-field economic theories.
    I am paid to perform economic analysis concerning financial markets. No confusion.
    You're like a kid who reads war books telling a bird colonel that he's not a soldier. Riiight.

    Quote Originally posted by bud View post
    ...notion that money is capital,,,Money is entirely on the other side of the equation – it is a measure of Wealth
    Your definition of capital is debatable but, more importantly, irrelevant to economic discussions. Productive people, business people, bankers, are about productive capital. It can certainly take immaterial forms (knowledge, brands, etc.), but een those can typcially be monetized. Is money / capital an incomplete measure of "well being" ot wealth in its broadest sense. Of course. So what?

    Quote Originally posted by bud View post
    Planners do well in that regard, often in conflict with the big money boys of your ilk.
    Unlike some posters. I am here to learn: about planning, the urban environment, etc. and exchange ideas about it. I don't think it's useful to insult a whole profession like planning or even (gasp) architecture. I guess City boys are fair game, eh? Ugly thing, envy.
    Life and death of great pattern languages

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Apply for jobs not fully qualified for or not?
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 5
    Last post: 14 Mar 2008, 2:29 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last post: 30 Jun 2006, 11:45 AM
  3. Replies: 22
    Last post: 14 Dec 2004, 4:39 PM
  4. Help me understand the peaceniks
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 11
    Last post: 26 Oct 2001, 9:56 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last post: 18 Dec 2000, 9:08 AM