[dead]
The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
41–50 of 58 posts
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#42It's sad that someone like the author would spend so much time avoiding understanding basic economics like subjective value, marginal value, voluntary exchanges etc. There are plenty of economics who never use any maths and help in understanding finance without resorting to this kind of silly critic
[dead]
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#43[deleted]
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#44Yes, yes the markets are an ideology and by changing the ideology we can build a better world what could possibly go wrong
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#45This is a great introduction to how valuation of public stocks works. In short, market capitalization is positively correlated with gross margin rates and negatively correlated with earnings volatility and the discount rate, which is a leading indicator for FFR.
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way to convince people the 101 stuff is bunk is to refer to the 101 stuff correctly, and explain why it doesn't work (or alternatively, come up with a better model), not to try to explain how some of it , fail to acknowledge other parts and imply there are gaps in it. Quoting the Bible is one of the more common methods of arguing against it or beliefs [purportedly] based on it, and certainly a better way of argui…
You are correct, I posted to fast. I retract post. I do often think the best way to convince people to not be Christian is to have them read the Bible. Most Christians have no idea what they believe in, and don't know what is in the Bible (like in US where they think Jesus was pro-Gun, kill thy neighbor). Just reading the Bible is enough to convince people to not be Christian. So, if I take this reasoning back to Eco…
I mean, freshman taking economics classes and learning "here's a theory and its assumptions here's a theory of why this may be wrong and are some counter examples" is going to be a lot better informed about the limitations of theories than someone that doesn't. It's a bit like if you want to learn the limitations of models predicting weather, you probably want a meteorology course, not a list of climate sceptic blogs written by people who hate climate models more out of political objection to their implications than the detail.
You don't need to take an undergraduate course to understand basics like capitalization (i.e sometimes people value stuff now because they think it will make them more money in future, and people will be willing to sell it for less because they have different expectations, risk tolerance or investment opportunities available to them.. its not exactly one of the more controversial or less practically applied parts of economic theory). But you probably want to read an introductory text, not the guy who pronounces that it's part of the heresy of "economics" and then constructs a straw man version of the theory that actually misses the most important bits.
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are correct, I posted to fast. I retract post. I do often think the best way to convince people to not be Christian is to have them read the Bible. Most Christians have no idea what they believe in, and don't know what is in the Bible (like in US where they think Jesus was pro-Gun, kill thy neighbor). Just reading the Bible is enough to convince people to not be Christian. So, if I take this reasoning back to Eco…
I mean, freshman taking economics classes and learning "here's a theory and its assumptions here's a theory of why this may be wrong and are some counter examples" is going to be a lot better informed about the limitations of theories than someone that doesn't. It's a bit like if you want to learn the limitations of models predicting weather, you probably want a meteorology course, not a list of climate sceptic blogs…
> I mean, freshman taking economics classes and learning "here's a theory and its assumptions here's a theory of why this may be wrong and are some counter examples"
Indeed, except it not how most eco 101 goes, at all …
> It's a bit like if you want to learn the limitations of models predicting weather, you probably want a meteorology
Except one is actually science, whereas the other is political philosophy which pretends to be science in order to justify its perspective. Studying theology isn't necessary to be able to criticize religion. It can ne useful if you want to give theoligical criticism of religion but that's it.
Ans I say that as someone who's spent 5 Yeats studying economics for the exact reason you mention. It turns out it's ideology all the way down…
And the author is also very familiar with econ 101, he's just not reusing these concepts from the canon, because in fact they're mostly ideological ans not very helpful to understand the real world.
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#48The article mentions that property existed in feudal Europe, so isn’t per se linked to capitalism. But the thesis is that capitalization is per se linked to capitalism. Then capitalization/capitalism is linked to caring not about actual property (things in the world) but income. Here’s the problem;
That is exactly the way things worked in feudal Europe. Nobles were interested in acquiring, for example, rights to a demesne lands not because they were interested in how much food they could produce or whatever, but because it was an income stream. At first, that meant in-kind income. Towards the later Middle Ages, it was monetized into cash income.
I don’t have a larger point, except to say that the person is so focused on their critique of capitalism that their explanation of what is essential to capitalism is wrong.
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
A more apt comparison would be an easy written by monk about physics that doesn't talk about, well, anything that didn't fit into the scripture.
Except that “risks and inventives” aren't laws of physics, they are pieces of the dogma (and worshipers dont usually see the difference between the later and the former: it is the essence of religion to believe the dogma as if it was some kind of transcendantal law)
All of these concepts have predictive power that is proven with hard data every day. And unlike physics, it's one of the most democratic realms of knowledge: if you think that these predictions are wrong, you can make yourself a lot of money.
Re: The Ritual of Capitalization (2021)
#50Coase’s Theorem (not technically a theorem) provides the basis for putting numbers on things, it’s not arbitrary. The specific numbers criticized (1.3%, 7%) decided on by economists are indeed arbitrary, though.
> The specific numbers criticized (1.3%, 7%) decided on by economists are indeed arbitrary
But these numbers aren't chosen by economists or any other individual. If prices aren't arbitrary then neither are discount rates.