lol... Krugman makin em mad [video]

[Type Username Here]

Obama also won a Nobel Prize for peace.

 

[Type Username Here]

Some critics argue that the prestige of the Prize in Economics derives in part from its association with the Nobel Prizes, an association that has often been a source of controversy. Among them is the Swedish human rights lawyer Peter Nobel, a great-grandson of Ludvig Nobel.[24] Nobel criticizes the awarding institution of misusing his family's name, and states that no member of the Nobel family has ever had the intention of establishing a prize in economics.[25]
According to Samuel Brittan of the Financial Times, both former Swedish minister of finance Kjell-Olof Feldt and Gunnar Myrdal wanted the prize abolished, saying "Myrdal rather less graciously wanted the prize abolished because it had been given to such reactionaries as Hayek (and afterwards Milton Friedman)."[22]
In his speech at the 1974 Nobel Banquet Friedrich Hayek stated that if he had been consulted whether to establish a Nobel Prize in economics he would "have decidedly advised against it"[22][26] primarily because "the Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess... This does not matter in the natural sciences. Here the influence exercised by an individual is chiefly an influence on his fellow experts; and they will soon cut him down to size if he exceeds his competence. But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally."

 

[88m3]

Obama also won a Nobel Prize for peace.

The European Union did as well

 

[Type Username Here]

Economics is not a science. It's a form of manipulation. These men are all quite smart, and dive into the realms of mathematics and objective research, but at the end of day, there job is to infuse political thinking and agendas.

I'm saying this while usually agreeing 90% with Krugman.

I put that shyt right there with Sociology.

 

[Brown_Pride]

Have you ever read a Krugman column? He always attacks the speaker with names and insults. In virtually every piece he writes, Krugman describes Republicans as radicals, extremists, idiots, etc.

The worst example was four years ago when the Tea Party first started to gain steam. Krugman would literally write a column every week calling them violent and trying to link them with violent acts. Just an hour after Congresswoman Gabbie Giffords was shot in Arizona, he had a post on his blog pointing the finger at Sarah Palin and the Tea Party for the actions of the shooter.

Falsely blaming innocent people for murder in an effort to score political points is the definition of a hack. Sadly, Krugman is a huge idol to many of the nutcases on the left.

the point of my post was that attacking the speaker is ignorant. You then proceed to attack the speaker

Is the message sound? Then speak to the message and talking points. I said the GOP talking points are dead in the water, in absence of any substance to discuss talking heads are now discussing people (MORESO) than before, or so it seams to me...

I wont deny dems do similar things too, just saying right now the GOP has no legs to stand on. Were the dems to try they could run through the GOP right now, the momentum is there.

 

[Brown_Pride]

Economics is not a science. It's a form of manipulation. These men are all quite smart, and dive into the realms of mathematics and objective research, but at the end of day, there job is to infuse political thinking and agendas.

I'm saying this while usually agreeing 90% with Krugman.

I put that shyt right there with Sociology.

I dapped you but will add that while both Sociology and Economics have their issues i'd still consider them a science. Albeit not a science you can quantify in many aspects but there's still something there.

While you cannot predict things with 100% accuracy because of the "human nature" factor you can get fairly close in a lot of areas based on analysis of the past. Predicting the future on the other hand is like meteorology. Do you lump meteorology in with these other 2 as well?

 

[Type Username Here]

I dapped you but will add that while both Sociology and Economics have their issues i'd still consider them a science. Albeit not a science you can quantify in many aspects but there's still something there.

While you cannot predict things with 100% accuracy because of the "human nature" factor you can get fairly close in a lot of areas based on analysis of the past. Predicting the future on the other hand is like meteorology. Do you lump meteorology in with these other 2 as well?

Meterorology is based on predicting patterns of non-thinking things. They use significant simulations and probabilities to make a guess. It's much more grounded, even if it is still totally unpredictable. And Climatology will always superecede Metereology in that aspect.

When it comes to predicting behavioral patters of human beings, I'm much less inclined to put a lot of weight on it. Things like Economics, Sociology and to a certain degree, psychology are not the same in my eyes as biology, physics, neuroscience, etc..

That's just my opinion and I know I'm in the minority.

 

[zerozero]

sociology and anthropology are much better than economics. They actually examine the unseen variables happening on the ground between people

 

[Brown_Pride]

Meterorology is based on predicting patterns of non-thinking things. They use significant simulations and probabilities to make a guess. It's much more grounded, even if it is still totally unpredictable. And Climatology will always superecede Metereology in that aspect.

When it comes to predicting behavioral patters of human beings, I'm much less inclined to put a lot of weight on it. Things like Economics, Sociology and to a certain degree, psychology are not the same in my eyes as biology, physics, neuroscience, etc..

That's just my opinion and I know I'm in the minority.

nah i get what you're getting at. It's what i'd call an "inexact science" (my accounting prof used to say the same thing about accounting lol )

You can predict human patterns to a degree though. If I have a table of shyt and a table of steak and shove 10 starving people into the room i'm betting 10/10 head over to the steak table.

Just saying there's a way to predict human nature with a degree of accuracy on a lot of levels. There's a reason marketing works.

 

[Loose]

Economics is not a science. It's a form of manipulation. These men are all quite smart, and dive into the realms of mathematics and objective research, but at the end of day, there job is to infuse political thinking and agendas.

I'm saying this while usually agreeing 90% with Krugman.

I put that shyt right there with Sociology.

you slow down their fellow economics has never proclaimed itself to forecast the future, especially knowing that human error exist. It's not a form of manipulation, its always been extremely subjective research ; why do you think so many variety of theoretical differences exist? do anyone believe everything an econometrician forecast, if so I need to become one. the issue with economics is that politicians like to apply the same approach to each issue because of their respective thoughts.

 

[Type Username Here]

nah i get what you're getting at. It's what i'd call an "inexact science" (my accounting prof used to say the same thing about accounting lol )

You can predict human patterns to a degree though. If I have a table of shyt and a table of steak and shove 10 starving people into the room i'm betting 10/10 head over to the steak table.

Just saying there's a way to predict human nature with a degree of accuracy on a lot of levels. There's a reason marketing works.

What if you randomly pick your sample, and the 10 people turn out to have severe allergic reactions to beef meat or are devout Hindus?

 

[Brown_Pride]

What if you randomly pick your sample, and the 10 people turn out to have severe allergic reactions to beef meat or are devout Hindus?

i'm pretty sure that scenario is part of Alanis Morset's Ironic isn't it?
"woke up in,
a room with shyt,
on the other side,
steaks did sit,
starving yeah, this might be good for you
but wouldn't you know, I was born Hindu
Isn't it ironic..."



i'm still beating they don't eat shyt They might not eat the meat but they ain't eating shyt.

 

[Type Username Here]

i'm pretty sure that scenario is part of Alanis Morset's Ironic isn't it?
"woke up in,
a room with shyt,
on the other side,
steaks did sit,
starving yeah, this might be good for you
but wouldn't you know, I was born Hindu
Isn't it ironic..."



i'm still beating they don't eat shyt They might not eat the meat but they ain't eating shyt.

What's the probability of one turning towards cannibalism?

 

[Brown_Pride]

What's the probability of one turning towards cannibalism?

i don't know but i bet if we set up this scenario 1000 times we could find out

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Can you be a hack with a Nobel Prize in Economics?

Can you win the Nobel Peace prize w/a military program built around drone assaults on innocent civilians?