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

Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 143 posts

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#31

Post by zbsisbd »

Retric wrote: post #20
soniman wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A draft raises the cost of war, making war less likely.

That depends on how easy it is to get out if it. If the influential always go to the coast guard or whatever, war is less meaningful for those in power.

“That depends on how easy it is to get out if it.”

Exactly. That’s why I despise ppl whose connections got them out of the draft. For everyone of those punks, another one of McNamara's morons had to be drafted.

Mohamad Ali, on the other hand, he had the courage to go to jail.

Burn your draft card, escape to Canada, or simply refuse. But those who use university exemptions or bone spurs can go to hell.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#32

Post by benj111 »

klez wrote: post #14
gojomo wrote: post #8

Applebaum tries to finger "elfin libertarian" Milton Friedman as "the most important figure". But the specific policies he attributes to Friedman don't seem so bad: * end the draft, replace with well-paid all-volunteer military * let international exchange rates vary * evaluate regulations based on the cost-to-save-a-life Does Applebaum want to bring back the draft? Put exchange rates back under direct political cont…

There are reasons the draft can be a good idea. When the military is only voluntary you get a military with specific ideas about foreign policy and how you see the enemy, whoever they are. If you introduce the draft you have a more heterogenous military.

I'm not convinced.

Assuming you even recruit the officer class from draftees, you're going to recruit the ones that think like you, or at least that you respect, which in practice means they know someone you respect, were taught somewhere you respect, in short they're probably from the same circles as you.

Plus if you don't want to join the military, are you really going to give a toss about contributing?

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#33

Post by ukj »

Nobody pays attention to Goodman's problem of induction [1].

The truth is that nobody really knows how we ought to arrange society, and which arrangement is likely to work. Everybody is guessing!

The moment you arrange the system one way, people game it and your economic model no longer applies. What worked in 1999 needs not work in 2019.

Blaming the people you chose to listen to is just another form of avoiding the elephant in the room - that you don't know how to decide who to listen to.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_riddle_of_induction

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#34

Post by chiefalchemist »

> "Why did America listen to the people who thought we needed “more millionaires and more bankrupts?”"

Pardon my somewhat unorthodox HN tone but who is "America" here? I'll tell you who it's not...plenty of those who voted for the current POTUS.

There was - and still is? - an economic narrative that's pumped out of W.DC via the the corporate media shoveling machine. That spin is disconnected from the reality that plenty of people are experiencing.

Regardless of the static thinking of leading economists, those theories have been tested time and again, and the market has spoken. There's a dark sad irony to the NYT taking notice of reality; mind you it's merely an op-ed.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#35

Post by colek42 »

klez wrote: post #14
gojomo wrote: post #8

Applebaum tries to finger "elfin libertarian" Milton Friedman as "the most important figure". But the specific policies he attributes to Friedman don't seem so bad: * end the draft, replace with well-paid all-volunteer military * let international exchange rates vary * evaluate regulations based on the cost-to-save-a-life Does Applebaum want to bring back the draft? Put exchange rates back under direct political cont…

There are reasons the draft can be a good idea. When the military is only voluntary you get a military with specific ideas about foreign policy and how you see the enemy, whoever they are. If you introduce the draft you have a more heterogenous military.

What specific kind of military do you get? The US military I was a part of was the most diverse group of men and women I have ever worked with in just any metric you can find.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#36

Post by codingslave »

abhinai wrote: post #10

Blame no one. I sincerely doubt if humans truly understand economics. I mean we have the data for last 100 years. Maybe more. And everything we know today has been inferred from this data. But honestly, how do we know how economy is supposed to behave over a 20 year period in a world of high frequency trading, automated trading, disruptive technologies, globalization, ability to work remotely, a Continental currency…

Computerized trading has minimal impact on real asset prices, it just adds efficiency and liquidity. Bitcoin is mostly used as a speculative investment vehicle and for illegal transactions. Most technology (Google/FB), took an existing industry and computerized it (Advertising). Nothing is new, and the situation we are in now was discussed 20 years ago as a possibility, just not by the economists and politicians in power.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#37

Post by gbacon »

gojomo wrote: post #8

Applebaum tries to finger "elfin libertarian" Milton Friedman as "the most important figure". But the specific policies he attributes to Friedman don't seem so bad: * end the draft, replace with well-paid all-volunteer military * let international exchange rates vary * evaluate regulations based on the cost-to-save-a-life Does Applebaum want to bring back the draft? Put exchange rates back under direct political cont…

Friedman’s worst idea that remains in vigorous implementation was automatic income tax withholding. He poured jet fuel into an engine of runaway state growth but is somehow remembered as a libertarian.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#38

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

sprafa wrote: post #22
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that was true, perhaps economists should put the "economics may be scientific, just not as reliable as you might expect" disclaimer in bolder letters.

Good economists do it. What makes you think economics is scientific? To be honest it seems to me we’re at the alchemy level of economics - basically we barely understand what we’re doing

Nothing makes me think economics is scientific.

But it's taught as if it's a science, handled inside academia as if it's a science, and has more influence on policy than hard science does.

If it's not a science, those three facts are rather curious.

Re: Blame Economists for the Mess We’re In

#40

Post by benj111 »

Doubl wrote: post #27

Isn't economics one of those disciplines where the more seriously a prediction is taken the less likely it is to be accurate. If people believe a prediction they alter their behavior and as a result the prediction fails.

If I predict your car is going to crash based on the fact that the tyres are bald, the brakes are worn, and the steering wheel isnt attached. You probably (if you take the prediction seriously) want have a crash, because you'll get the car fixed.

So it isn't a particular problem of economics. The problem of economics is testing theories. I would guess that most economists have a theory that never gets tested, because you can't test them in a lab, only in real life, the depth of knowledge just isnt there to know what will work, what won't, and popular but wrong theories aren't proven wrong fast enough. I cant reasonably say whether bald tyres will cause a crash, because no ones seen bald tyres before.

Post reply on HN