Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
¡¡¡Tema cerrado!!!
Asunto: »Political & economic ideologies (communism, capitalism et
Nice, some economists clashing their heads about some of their utopias in here *popcorn* :D
Funny thing is in the past I worked best together with hardheaded ppl that had totally different opinions from me and I would never befriend them in real life. ;-)
So if you want to work for a bigger asshole than me in a big four auditing company who will let you work 60 hours a week and give you work back home for the weekend so that you make minimum wage every month the hour for 3 month. Well give me a call he is working in Paris now. ;-)
I could land you a job interview.
So if you want to work for a bigger asshole than me in a big four auditing company who will let you work 60 hours a week and give you work back home for the weekend so that you make minimum wage every month the hour for 3 month. Well give me a call he is working in Paris now. ;-)
I could land you a job interview.
So if you want to work for a bigger asshole than me in a big four auditing company who will let you work 60 hours a week and give you work back home for the weekend so that you make minimum wage every month the hour for 3 month.
Well, friends of mine work for a Big Four auditing company. They do not make the minimum wage.
Well, friends of mine work for a Big Four auditing company. They do not make the minimum wage.
Well, friends of mine work for a Big Four auditing company. They do not make the minimum wage.
I take back what I said if you can't work out roughly that ~ 30*10 / 3000 is only 10 € an hour. If you are not able to put things like that together in your head you would not last more than 4 weeks anyway.
I take back what I said if you can't work out roughly that ~ 30*10 / 3000 is only 10 € an hour. If you are not able to put things like that together in your head you would not last more than 4 weeks anyway.
As long as you realize that your defense of a big government here was very, very weak ;-)
I don't care what you say or think about me. In order for you to insult me, I'd first have to value your opinion.
(editado)
I don't care what you say or think about me. In order for you to insult me, I'd first have to value your opinion.
(editado)
I wanto to say only that:
Economic is NOT a science, it can't be properly, so everybody claims to "know" something about it is liyng.
Economic is NOT a science, it can't be properly, so everybody claims to "know" something about it is liyng.
Economic is NOT a science, it can't be properly, so everybody claims to "know" something about it is liyng.
Trol somewhere else please.
Trol somewhere else please.
Trol somewhere else please.
I told you once , I'll repeat myself, don't respond to me please, you simply can't undestand a word about this topic, so let me be and live happily without this kind of posts.
I told you once , I'll repeat myself, don't respond to me please, you simply can't undestand a word about this topic, so let me be and live happily without this kind of posts.
so let me be and live happily without this kind of posts.
I will not tolerate stupid claims without any reaction, sorry.
I will not tolerate stupid claims without any reaction, sorry.
I will not tolerate stupid claims
hey... look who's saying it...
seriously leave me be..
you don't use your mind to think at what I wrote, but how to get some point for yourself. I don't deserve this discussion at all!
hey... look who's saying it...
seriously leave me be..
you don't use your mind to think at what I wrote, but how to get some point for yourself. I don't deserve this discussion at all!
Why is Economics not a science? Because it can't be? Seems like a weird way of argumentation. Do you want to convince people with that 'argument'?
you don't use your mind to think at what I wrote, but how to get some point for yourself.
You should use your head before you say something. What makes economics stand apart from psychology, sociology, ... Please, inform me.
Edit: or are these no sciences too, because they aren't exact sciences like maths, physics, ...
(editado)
You should use your head before you say something. What makes economics stand apart from psychology, sociology, ... Please, inform me.
Edit: or are these no sciences too, because they aren't exact sciences like maths, physics, ...
(editado)
or are these no sciences too, because they aren't exact sciences like maths, physics, ...
in fact those are more social studies than knowledge that permit any kind of exsact prediction. You can even call them sciences, but remember that you can't use them to know something for "sure".
looking at economy we can call it more a sum of philosofical/ideological ideas and authors, than a real science with some methodological tecnique. What kind of use we can make of this knowledge? We can use it as a language. It's a sum of discussion that helps us when we argue about this problem, but really nothing more.
But nobody keep it in mind discussing about economy, everybody discuss about "economy laws" or "mechanisms", that simply doesn't exsist at all.
Moreover we are subject to a continuing campaign of liberal propaganda that are financied by capital that need people convinced that market it's good, market is better, financing school of economy in the whole world.
So people that go to business school end in believing the markets theories, because no one think how those school were built (who paid/decide in them)
And we end reading in sokker foruma graduate person writing such things:
You cannot deny that the extent of government intervention is a main issue within economics.
that is the opposite of reality.
In reality you can't deny that the main issue within economics is the assence of regulation and of the state. Growth and wellness comed with rules and state EVERY TIME in history. Without only poverty and recession.
But they teach you another lesson... are you able to question it?
in fact those are more social studies than knowledge that permit any kind of exsact prediction. You can even call them sciences, but remember that you can't use them to know something for "sure".
looking at economy we can call it more a sum of philosofical/ideological ideas and authors, than a real science with some methodological tecnique. What kind of use we can make of this knowledge? We can use it as a language. It's a sum of discussion that helps us when we argue about this problem, but really nothing more.
But nobody keep it in mind discussing about economy, everybody discuss about "economy laws" or "mechanisms", that simply doesn't exsist at all.
Moreover we are subject to a continuing campaign of liberal propaganda that are financied by capital that need people convinced that market it's good, market is better, financing school of economy in the whole world.
So people that go to business school end in believing the markets theories, because no one think how those school were built (who paid/decide in them)
And we end reading in sokker foruma graduate person writing such things:
You cannot deny that the extent of government intervention is a main issue within economics.
that is the opposite of reality.
In reality you can't deny that the main issue within economics is the assence of regulation and of the state. Growth and wellness comed with rules and state EVERY TIME in history. Without only poverty and recession.
But they teach you another lesson... are you able to question it?
in fact those are more social studies than knowledge that permit any kind of exsact prediction. You can even call them sciences, but remember that you can't use them to know something for "sure".
That's why there is a difference between exact science and 'other' science (social science). Science doesn't mean that you are 'sure' (even in exact sciences like physics).
looking at economy we can call it more a sum of philosofical/ideological ideas and authors, than a real science with some methodological tecnique. What kind of use we can make of this knowledge? We can use it as a language. It's a sum of discussion that helps us when we argue about this problem, but really nothing more.
You're wrong. Of course there is political economics, but there is also something like non-political economics. For instance, in public economy courses, we studied the efficiency of taxes, without making any claim whether or not those taxes are 'right' or 'wrong'. It's non-judgmental economics. That does exists you know.
But nobody keep it in mind discussing about economy, everybody discuss about "economy laws" or "mechanisms", that simply doesn't exsist at all.
It does.
Moreover we are subject to a continuing campaign of liberal propaganda that are financied by capital that need people convinced that market it's good, market is better, financing school of economy in the whole world.
So people that go to business school end in believing the markets theories, because no one think how those school were built (who paid/decide in them)
Just like we are subject to a continuing campaign of collectivist, socialist propaganda. What's your point?
Growth and wellness comed with rules and state EVERY TIME in history. Without only poverty and recession.
Indeed, our wealth has come with rules and state. That wealth would have been bigger without such a big state.
That's why there is a difference between exact science and 'other' science (social science). Science doesn't mean that you are 'sure' (even in exact sciences like physics).
looking at economy we can call it more a sum of philosofical/ideological ideas and authors, than a real science with some methodological tecnique. What kind of use we can make of this knowledge? We can use it as a language. It's a sum of discussion that helps us when we argue about this problem, but really nothing more.
You're wrong. Of course there is political economics, but there is also something like non-political economics. For instance, in public economy courses, we studied the efficiency of taxes, without making any claim whether or not those taxes are 'right' or 'wrong'. It's non-judgmental economics. That does exists you know.
But nobody keep it in mind discussing about economy, everybody discuss about "economy laws" or "mechanisms", that simply doesn't exsist at all.
It does.
Moreover we are subject to a continuing campaign of liberal propaganda that are financied by capital that need people convinced that market it's good, market is better, financing school of economy in the whole world.
So people that go to business school end in believing the markets theories, because no one think how those school were built (who paid/decide in them)
Just like we are subject to a continuing campaign of collectivist, socialist propaganda. What's your point?
Growth and wellness comed with rules and state EVERY TIME in history. Without only poverty and recession.
Indeed, our wealth has come with rules and state. That wealth would have been bigger without such a big state.
You can even call them sciences, but remember that you can't use them to know something for "sure".
Knowing something for sure isn't necessary in science. Science isn't just prediction, it's also understanding. The science of economics provides several insights that other sciences do not provide. Economics provides understanding. Economics does not merely provide truisms, it also provides the explanation of several mechanisms and tendencies in economics: What happens if the price of a good goes up? What happens if I impose a tax? What happens if i subsidize a certain company? What happens if we ban alcohol? In answering these questions, you can just make stuff up, but it would not be easily accepted by the reader. A reader thinks logically and critically ( he should ), and if I answer the question "What happens if we ban alcohol?" with "everyone will stop using it", you (and others) will say, no this is not logical because of so and so. And you would be right.
Argumentation isn't just free floating words, but it is possible to find the truth by looking critically to arguments, and the best arguments 'win' so to speak.
edit. nvm
(editado)
Knowing something for sure isn't necessary in science. Science isn't just prediction, it's also understanding. The science of economics provides several insights that other sciences do not provide. Economics provides understanding. Economics does not merely provide truisms, it also provides the explanation of several mechanisms and tendencies in economics: What happens if the price of a good goes up? What happens if I impose a tax? What happens if i subsidize a certain company? What happens if we ban alcohol? In answering these questions, you can just make stuff up, but it would not be easily accepted by the reader. A reader thinks logically and critically ( he should ), and if I answer the question "What happens if we ban alcohol?" with "everyone will stop using it", you (and others) will say, no this is not logical because of so and so. And you would be right.
Argumentation isn't just free floating words, but it is possible to find the truth by looking critically to arguments, and the best arguments 'win' so to speak.
edit. nvm
(editado)