Comments for "Principles of economics, translated" Video at VideoSift.com

By maudlin

maudlin (http://maudlin.videosift.com) — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:51:31 -0800

The full article from AIR is here.

By NordlichReiter

NordlichReiter (http://www.videosift.com/member/NordlichReiter) — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:59:21 -0800

That was cool!

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:16:33 -0800

Heh, Maudlin. You'd be surprised how many people can't get those simple concepts. Economics is a new evolving science, it's the science of markets in the long term.

By maudlin

maudlin (http://maudlin.videosift.com) — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:25:23 -0800

Ah. So if this is a science ... *adds to collective*

Yeah, my husband the chemical engineer likes to sum up thermodynamics as "You can't win, you can't break even, and you can't get out of the game." Upvote all plain English "rules"!

By supersaiyan93

supersaiyan93 (http://www.videosift.com/member/supersaiyan93) — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:22:09 -0800

I LOVED this! I'm going to email this to my old b-school buddies.

By yaroslavvb

yaroslavvb (http://www.videosift.com/member/yaroslavvb) — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 00:59:53 -0800

A lot of economics is not science in a sense that it's missing one of 3 steps (build a model, make prediction, test prediction experimentally), but a some of it is a science even under this narrow definition (like Kahneman and Tversky work for instance)

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 08:30:17 -0800

Most of basic economics has the 3 steps you mentioned, and uses large amounts of mathematics to model behavior that is expected in markets and etc.

However it doesn't really apply since a model cannot really account for the vast amount of factors we face in the real world. Thats why there is the hypothesis and such steps.

But it's sure as hell more scientific then political science.

By yaroslavvb

yaroslavvb (http://www.videosift.com/member/yaroslavvb) — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 21:44:43 -0800

To me it seems that most of economics is missing the "make a prediction, then test it" step. I say that because I see that most articles in top economics journals are explanatory rather predictive. For instance, American Economic Review is the top economics journal using citations per article metric, and you can see that it's most influential articles (most citations, I just looked at the top 50 cited papers) are about explaining various economical events, rather than making/verifying testable predictions

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=American+Economic+Review&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_allsubj=all&hl=en&lr=

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 21:49:09 -0800

I don't read the American Economic Review, it's a bit shit.

By bizinichi

bizinichi (http://www.videosift.com/member/bizinichi) — Sun, 04 Mar 2007 13:45:59 -0800

The reason its missing that step is because the world isn't a controlled evironment where you can run those types of experiments. You can't just take a guy give him $100 and see what his choices are etc or experiment with a goverment and see the outcomes. You're talking about millions of lives affected, right there. So that's pretty much why theres no experimental ability to economics and I suppose the way to conduct any such experiment is to make a educamated guess and see the results... Kinda slow to progress that way, isnt it.

By gorgonheap

gorgonheap (http://www.videosift.com/member/gorgonheap) — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 10:01:20 -0800

I think you can sum up economics like this. In order for someone to profit someone has to sacrafice. usually that just gets passed on to the next person and creates a deficit. So you'll always owe someone something.

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 10:42:10 -0800

That's a bit simplified really.

The reason someone has to sacrifice is becuase we have infinite wants and finite resources in which to meet them.

By oohahh

oohahh (http://oohahh.videosift.com) — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 22:11:07 -0800

Well go figure. I went to college with this guy. Had to check; I mean, how many Yoram Baumans can there be in the world?

By messenger

messenger (http://www.videosift.com/member/messenger) — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 00:49:12 -0800

You had me at "blah blah blah"

By pmkierst

pmkierst (http://www.videosift.com/member/pmkierst) — Tue, 06 Mar 2007 18:09:03 -0800

Economics in the Science collective, lol!

By pass.the.grog.

pass.the.grog. (http://www.videosift.com/member/pass.the.grog.) — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 00:06:59 -0800

at least the "blah blah blah" was dead on.

He had some good points, e.g. trade can make everyone worse off.

By theo47

theo47 (http://www.videosift.com/member/theo47) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:17:56 -0700

*promote

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:17:58 -0700

Re-promoting this video to the front page as a VideoSift Classic. Originally published on Friday 2nd March 2007 (promotion called by gold star member theo47)

By theo47

theo47 (http://www.videosift.com/member/theo47) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 13:20:53 -0700

Good stuff, but economics is NOT a science, farhad - it's a sociological construct that occasionally uses scientific principles...and is just as occasionally faith-based. No wonder egghead conservatives love it so.

By joedirt

joedirt (http://www.videosift.com/member/joedirt) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:24:33 -0700

Farhad say, "Yes, I agree with that clarification, I believe it's people most misguided about economics that want to profess it as the ultimate solution to all the world's problems. It's too common for people with little to no knowledge to profess normative statements about economics that should really be relegated in favor of more concrete assessments. "

And he thinks he's sexy.

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:46:26 -0700

*blog

Hey I just wrote that comment above but it shows Joedirt wrote it?

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:46:27 -0700

Sending this video to Sift Talk for discussion (sent by gold star member Farhad2000)

By pyrex

pyrex (http://www.videosift.com/member/pyrex) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:49:41 -0700

I can testify to the er.. truthiness of Farhad's statement. I was VOIPing with him when he exclaims "WHAT THE FUCK?!"

Sounds like a helluva wonky DB transaction error.

By Farhad2000

Farhad2000 (http://farhad.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 17:00:43 -0700

Okay I wrote it once, then edited, then deleted and rewrote it. I wanted to add something else but when I came back it said JoeDirt posted. I fell in into a M.C. Esher daze but soon recovered...

I want to clarify further and add something to what Theo47 said, Economics is a science, it's the science and study of finite resources in a world of infinite wants. I think you forget that both science and faith have been corrupted countless times to carry out political agendas. I mean the entire theory of German nazi superiority was professed by using scientific methods to measure skulls and such to prove racial inferiority. Is science thus inherently evil? One can take that stance by saying it lead to atomic weapons and such... but we know to look beyond that for science is the pursuit of truth and doesn't carry an idealogical stance.

Economics doesn't carry a capitalistic agenda like you seem to think, it is the methodology to study finite resource allocation. Capitalism, socialism, all these ways of looking at the markets factor in. Just because Milton Friedman professes one stance and you happened to have read him doesn't meant he stands for the entirety of the economic field. Social good, external costs to enviroment all feature in economics. It's not the fault of this academic field of study for the corporate stance that profits should be pursued at all costs to the enviroment and it's own consumer base, when any long term assessment would show that unnatural profits are a impossibility in reality. But people are greedy.

By dag

dag (http://dag.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:14:42 -0700

That's strange about the comment thing. We'll look into it. Should I delete it?

By joedirt

joedirt (http://www.videosift.com/member/joedirt) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 18:56:06 -0700

we both had ajax comments out at the same time?

By joedirt

joedirt (http://www.videosift.com/member/joedirt) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:00:01 -0700

*return

Not isolated to this video. I just checked out my recent comments and I guess I've been busy saying all sorts of things.. quite a few [deleted]

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 19:00:02 -0700

Returning this video from Sift Talk (Returned by gold star member joedirt)

By jwray

jwray (http://jwray.videosift.com) — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:03:17 -0700

"Infinite wants" are not held by everyone.

By rembar

rembar (http://www.videosift.com/member/rembar) — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 19:28:06 -0700

*science

By MycroftHomlz

MycroftHomlz (http://www.videosift.com/member/MycroftHomlz) — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:08:49 -0800

*money

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:08:49 -0800

Adding video to channels (Money) - requested by MycroftHomlz.