51–60 of 108 posts
https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/krugman_lecture.p...
https://pr.princeton.edu/pictures/g-k/krugman/krugman-increa...
The interstellar element feels like an extension of that.
If we all practiced isolationism and protectionism on the global level here on Earth, we would be much better off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm trying to imagine a physical product that is worth transporting on an interstellar level, rather than locally manufactured. It seems to me that the only thing that would ever be exchanged between solar systems, would be information.
Why are Stradivarius violins held in such high regard? The presence of natural resources is not the same as having the craftmanship able to best utilize them. And when scarcity of resources are not a problem, craftsmanship becomes even more important to people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm trying to imagine a physical product that is worth transporting on an interstellar level, rather than locally manufactured. It seems to me that the only thing that would ever be exchanged between solar systems, would be information.
Even exchanging information doesn't doesn't make much sense, given the time lag involved with light-speed limitations. Another answer for the Fermi Paradox, maybe.
I realize that Krugman was being tongue in cheek in this work, but a lot of the work in theory-heavy areas of "mathematical" economics are similar exercises in obscurity and dubious scientific value. Krugman, in one of his autobiographical essays, described economics as the field that people get into when they can't hack it in math, physics or some other high-rigor STEM field. Part of proving one's intelligence as a…
Maybe you refer to this: How Did Economists Get It So Wrong? https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.htm... Soon Krugman wrote another piece because people misunderstood what he said: Mathematics and economics https://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/11/mathematics-and... >I’ve been getting some comments from people who think my magazine piece was an attack on the use of mathematics in economics. It…
It was back when people had janky self-hosted html sites, and the like; probably written in the late '90s.
Abstract: > This paper extends interplanetary trade to an interstellar setting. It is chiefly concerned with the following question: How should interest on goods in tranist be computed when the goods travel at close to the speed of light? This is a problem because the time taken in transit will appear less to an observer travelling with the goods than to a stationary observer. A solution is derived from economic theo…
I'm trying to imagine a physical product that is worth transporting on an interstellar level, rather than locally manufactured. It seems to me that the only thing that would ever be exchanged between solar systems, would be information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait until we have Galactic Economics and other voodoo fields of study* , and beings start being convinced of "specialisation" on a cosmic scale. *Not unlike it's current-day counterpart, Macroeconomics.
The paper is a thought experiment, written in a somewhat whimsical tone. In certain respects, macroeconomics is wildly successful, so successful that people take it for granted. It's bad at forecasting recessions, but good at telling us how to react to them. It was bad at predicting 2008 would happen, but was good at preventing 2008 in turning into 1929. There's no way macroeconomics could predict COVID would happen…
That is such an unfair comparison. You don't know that 2008 wasn't as bad as 1929 because we have a better food supply chain and food productivity (norman borlaug and all that), and healthcare technology, and not because of macroeconomic guidance.
Macroeconomic guidance, after all, is what has got us to a state where we bail out the rich by stealing from the productive value of the poor.
Abstract: > This paper extends interplanetary trade to an interstellar setting. It is chiefly concerned with the following question: How should interest on goods in tranist be computed when the goods travel at close to the speed of light? This is a problem because the time taken in transit will appear less to an observer travelling with the goods than to a stationary observer. A solution is derived from economic theo…
I'm trying to imagine a physical product that is worth transporting on an interstellar level, rather than locally manufactured. It seems to me that the only thing that would ever be exchanged between solar systems, would be information.
Abstract: > This paper extends interplanetary trade to an interstellar setting. It is chiefly concerned with the following question: How should interest on goods in tranist be computed when the goods travel at close to the speed of light? This is a problem because the time taken in transit will appear less to an observer travelling with the goods than to a stationary observer. A solution is derived from economic theo…
I'm trying to imagine a physical product that is worth transporting on an interstellar level, rather than locally manufactured. It seems to me that the only thing that would ever be exchanged between solar systems, would be information.
The next global pandemic?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The paper is a thought experiment, written in a somewhat whimsical tone. In certain respects, macroeconomics is wildly successful, so successful that people take it for granted. It's bad at forecasting recessions, but good at telling us how to react to them. It was bad at predicting 2008 would happen, but was good at preventing 2008 in turning into 1929. There's no way macroeconomics could predict COVID would happen…
> but was good at preventing 2008 in turning into 1929 That is such an unfair comparison. You don't know that 2008 wasn't as bad as 1929 because we have a better food supply chain and food productivity (norman borlaug and all that), and healthcare technology, and not because of macroeconomic guidance. Macroeconomic guidance, after all, is what has got us to a state where we bail out the rich by stealing from the prod…
In 2008, governments prevented the banking system from collapsing, and were able to rapidly expand the money supply because there's no gold standard. The US was the epicenter of the crisis, but recovered faster than Europe because it was more aggressive. In 2020, the response was even more aggressive, and the recovery faster.
The US hasn't pursued the ideal policy, but the policy it has pursued has made recessions shorter than they would be, otherwise. If anything, the lesson of 2020 is that governments should follow the advice of macroeconomists more than they already do.