Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 286 posts

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#171

Post by dataking »

viburnum wrote: post #169

This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important. Cowen is framing economics to exclude things like unemployment, the process by which investment, savings, and income are determined, and the distribution of income. If you get people into the weeds about sticky prices and whatnot, it’s like putting blinders on a horse.

> This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important.

I think your assumption of malice is unfounded. A likely benign explanation is that Cowen focused on areas there economists are in broad agreement without intent to mislead.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#172

Post by viburnum »

sadmann1 wrote: post #92

What are the best introductory books to get more grounded in economics

“The Worldly Philosohers” is very good. Economics is full of controversies and contested ideas so it’s best to take them head on rather than pretending it’s physics.

If you’re looking for a textbook, this is the best (it’s also free):

https://www.core-econ.org/the-economy/book/text/0-3-contents...

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#173

Post by lottin »

viburnum wrote: post #169

This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important. Cowen is framing economics to exclude things like unemployment, the process by which investment, savings, and income are determined, and the distribution of income. If you get people into the weeds about sticky prices and whatnot, it’s like putting blinders on a horse.

The first "truth" he mentions is literally about wages and unemployment.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#174

Post by Leparamour »

brazzy wrote: post #170
p1necone wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure you can have the entire worlds information and entertainment at your fingertips with a $50 smartphone, but if you can't afford to have a roof over your head I'd argue the smartphone is irrelevant. I don't think we should be including basic necessities alongside improvements in entertainment in the same statistic, because it will just hide problems.

> but if you can't afford to have a roof over your head I'd argue the smartphone is irrelevant. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of homeless people would disagree vehemently. Not only does smartphone make it much easier to find a job and get back to the point where you can afford a roof over your head, it allows you to stay in touch with people you care about, people who may help you out now and then. And it gi…

Can homeless people afford data plans?

Luckily I haven't been homeless yet, but there were times when I was too poor to have enough phone credit for internet or even regular calls. Granted, there are places that offer free wifi but only with an order if you are a paying customer, which I think most homeless people aren't.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#175

Post by RobertoG »

dataking wrote: post #171
viburnum wrote: post #169

This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important. Cowen is framing economics to exclude things like unemployment, the process by which investment, savings, and income are determined, and the distribution of income. If you get people into the weeds about sticky prices and whatnot, it’s like putting blinders on a horse.

> This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important. I think your assumption of malice is unfounded. A likely benign explanation is that Cowen focused on areas there economists are in broad agreement without intent to mislead.

The grandparent is not attributing malice to the author, but to the way the framework of economics is built. Cowen probably believe that what is saying is true and can't see different anymore.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#176

Post by RobertoG »

lottin wrote: post #173
viburnum wrote: post #169

This is a good example of how so much economics is meant to distract you from what’s important. Cowen is framing economics to exclude things like unemployment, the process by which investment, savings, and income are determined, and the distribution of income. If you get people into the weeds about sticky prices and whatnot, it’s like putting blinders on a horse.

The first "truth" he mentions is literally about wages and unemployment.

But he does it in a very specific framework that is never challenged. That's the trick and what, I think, the grandparent is referring to.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#177

Post by ido »

xyzzyz wrote: post #29
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but a smartphone has become a component of participation in society. No one buys landline telephones anymore, but they were a part of a typical family budget in the 50s.

Yes, but you can easily buy a smartphone for <$50. It might be crap by today standards, but it will still be better than any smartphone was in 2010.

I thought so too and then bought a cheap motorla android phone (it was more than $50, i think more like $100+) and it was absolutely much worse than a 2010-vintage iphone 4 (or the highest end android you could get in 2010).

The CPU is faster and it has more RAM but somehow the user experience is absolutely atrocious - it was not even fast enough to be able to reliably answer calls (the UI was stuttery and it took multiple seconds to unlock the screen, which by then the call went to voicemail).

It would constantly fail to do every days tasks (apps would freeze and crash, including the built-in apps) and would slow down randomly making it barely usable.

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#179

Post by RobertoG »

>>"The third thing to know is that if central banks go crazy increasing the money supply, the result will be high price inflation. There is one exception to this, which was evident in 2008 and 2009 [..]"

Japan has been doing that for decades now, and none of the mainstream macroeconomics prediction came true.

>>"If central banks simultaneously act to decrease the velocity of money — that is, if they take measures to reduce borrowing and lending — then price inflation will be limited accordingly."

What are those measures he is talking about?

Re: Four Basic Truths of Macroeconomics

#180

Post by [deleted] »

freddie_mercury wrote: post #125
WalterBright wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Non-monetary problems like oil shocks and pandemics can cause recessions It wasn't the oil shock of the 70's that caused recession. It was our response to it - Nixon's oil and gas price & allocation controls. We came out of that when Reagan repealed it. Our current recession is not caused by the pandemic, but the lockdown response to it.

This is obviously false and all you have to do is acknowledge there are other countries in the world besides the US. Every country in the world was subjected to oil shocks. Not every country had price controls. Every country experienced a recession. Likewise, every country experienced the pandemic. Not every country had lockdowns. Every country experienced recessions. Posts that had simple explanations for complex ph…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN