Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychology?

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychology?

Economics can explain more than sociology and more than psychology.
9
69%
Economics can explain more than psychology but not more than sociology.
0
No votes
Economics can explain more than sociology but not more than psychology.
1
8%
Economics can explain just as much as sociology and psychology.
2
15%
Economics can explain just as much as sociology.
0
No votes
Economics can explain just as much as psychology.
0
No votes
Economics can merely explain less than sociology and less than psychology.
1
8%
I do not know.
0
No votes
 
Total votes : 13

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Sun Feb 07, 2016 8:57 pm

HaHaHa wrote:
Arbiter of Change wrote:Economics can be explained by referring back to human nature, and what is it that explores human nature?

Sounds like a typical reversal of hierarchy, looking at nature from the perspective of human social norms, instead of observing nature and how social norms emerge within it.

Unsurprisingly, appears it was employed by Marxism.


Market economics is a complete fiction and construct especially concerning traditional social hierarchy. There is nothing natural about it and it is all built upon bullshit obfuscations or assumptions of human nature.

Not much natural but much mathematical about it.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Tue Mar 08, 2016 12:24 am

James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:Many people fear mathematics, and many people are cynics. Now, combine this two facts, please!

They don't merely fear the math, they respect it as well.
James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:If they did not respect it, then they would not be cynics. So the furtive (secret) respect is already a part of the definition of "cynic".

Yeah .. I guess.

Many people fear economics too, ....
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:57 am

Outsider wrote:Economics can be explained by referring back to human nature, and what is it that explores human nature?

Sounds like a typical reversal of hierarchy, looking at nature from the perspective of human social norms, instead of observing nature and how social norms emerge within it.

No, that is not true. I regard the developmental way from human nature to human culture and from human culture to human nature. Economics is neither a begin (basis etc.) nor an end (goal etc.) in my philosophy. It is merely a part of the two ways (near the middle of each of them).

8_w.jpg
8_w.jpg (54.72 KiB) Viewed 1207 times
Last edited by Arminius on Mon Mar 14, 2016 10:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Meno_ » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:24 am

And yet economics determines value. And value determines sociology, and the way groups of people relate to each other in evaluating the ways they may seek advantages or suffer disadvantages in value, in relation to each other. Finally, as their evaluative skills improve,as they are able to focus in on individual measurement of value. The social and individual values interchange in a process increasing discrimination.

The individual evaluation is based on narrowing of social discrimination of a wider array of value. After that is reified, or learned, can individuals as representative of their kind of value become nominally valuable.

So its economy, sociology, then psychology.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Mictlantecuhtli » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:29 am

Arminius wrote:
HaHaHa wrote:
Arbiter of Change wrote:Economics can be explained by referring back to human nature, and what is it that explores human nature?

Sounds like a typical reversal of hierarchy, looking at nature from the perspective of human social norms, instead of observing nature and how social norms emerge within it.

Unsurprisingly, appears it was employed by Marxism.


Market economics is a complete fiction and construct especially concerning traditional social hierarchy. There is nothing natural about it and it is all built upon bullshit obfuscations or assumptions of human nature.

Not much natural but much mathematical about it.


Mathematical?
Civilization is a ship of fools headed to a one way destination of catastrophe and annihilation, its many captains populated by asshole-idiots that all agree it is unsinkable.

Image
User avatar
Mictlantecuhtli
Nihilistic Mystic And Hermit
 
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:31 am
Location: Concrete Wilderness.

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Mictlantecuhtli » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:33 am

The root of all economics is power, control, manipulation, profit, and exploitation. We really need to address that.

The fatal flaws of sociology and psychology is that they tend to address or focus on things very dogmatically which is why both are ineffective until the lens of morality along with authority are removed. Both systems of thought largely exist by making appeals to authority.
Civilization is a ship of fools headed to a one way destination of catastrophe and annihilation, its many captains populated by asshole-idiots that all agree it is unsinkable.

Image
User avatar
Mictlantecuhtli
Nihilistic Mystic And Hermit
 
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:31 am
Location: Concrete Wilderness.

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby zinnat » Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:37 am

I think that psychology is at the root of everything, then comes sociology and then economics.
Thus, economics explains less than both of sociology and psychology.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3501
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Mon Mar 14, 2016 10:21 am

HaHaHa wrote:
Arminius wrote:
HaHaHa wrote:Market economics is a complete fiction and construct especially concerning traditional social hierarchy. There is nothing natural about it and it is all built upon bullshit obfuscations or assumptions of human nature.

Not much natural but much mathematical about it.


Mathematical?

Economics, especially market economics, uses much mathematics.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:43 pm

Joker wrote:More reasons why I believe modern market economies are unnatural onto being fictitious insanities:

Crazy Horse- "One does not sell the land in which all living creatures walk on."

Economies are not autonomous.

Economics are subordinated to politics, religion, and social relations.

The market mechanism created the delusion of economic determinism.

Commodity rules the market place. Commodities are empirically defined as objects produced for sale on the market; markets, are empirically defined as actual contracts between buyers and sellers.

Labor, land , and money are essential elements of industry; they also must be organized in markets; infact these markets form an absolutely vital part of the economic system but labor,land and money are obviously not commodities; To postulate that anything that is bought and sold must have been produced for sale is untrue in regard to them.

Labor is only another name for a activity of men that goes with life itself, which in its turn is not produced for sale but for entirely different reasons, nor can that activity be detached from the rest of life, be stored or mobilized; land is only another name for nature, which is not produced by man; actual money finally is merely a token of purchasing power which as a rule is not produced at all but comes into being through the mechanism of banking or finance.

Labor and land were made into commodities, that is, they were treated as if produced for sale.

Of course they were not actually commodities since they were either not produced at all (as land) or, if so, not for sale ( as labor).

Land and labor are no other than the people themselves of which every society consists and the natural surroundings in which it exists. To include them in the market mechanism means to subordinate the substance of society itself to the laws of the market.

The organization of labor is only another word for the forms of life of the common people.

The commodity description of labor, land, and money is entirely fictitious by that of the equally fictitious priesthood that calls itself the market.

Nevertheless, it is with the help of this fiction that the actual markets for labor, and money are organized; they are being actually bought and sold on the market; their demand and supply have become real magnitudes; and any measures or policies that would inhibit the formation of such markets would ipso facto endanger the self regulation of the system.

The commodity fiction therefore supplies a vital organizing principle in regard to the whole of society affecting almost all its institutions in the most varied way namely the principle according to which no arrangement or behavior should be allowed to exist that might prevent the actual functioning of the market mechanism on the lines of the commodity fiction.

The extreme artificiality of market economies is rooted in the fact that the process of production itself is here organized in the form of buying and selling.

No other way of organizing producion for the market is possible in a commercial society.

A market economy can exist only in a market society.
|=>

davids04 wrote:Joker said:
Economics are subordinated to politics, religion, and social relations.

I would say it is the others that are subordinate to economics. Without having ones economic house in order first very little else is possible in the long run, whether it be in religion, politics or social relations. The discipline of economics affords us the sustenance, recourses and money to survive and continue, no matter what else one is doing. ](*,)
|=>

davids04 wrote:Isn't it always the economy, stupid?

Economics is the first discipline.
|=>

davids04 wrote:Joker, I can appreciate your effort but it's still pretty meek and unconvincing.

Economics is also about you making a living and having money to support yourself. Without that, a job or money to support yourself, nothing else much matters. That's why economics is number one.
|=>

Economics is not the number one. Economicis is subordinated but also superordinated. It depends on to what and whom.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Meno_ » Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:55 pm

The spatial determinants of the economy, later becoming the economy of the id, has the closest relationship to almost pre verbal - perceptual approach to the utilization of space, value, and social relativism. Migrant society on constant move, then settling down into a bartered society, is parallel to the post analysis phase of behaviorism.

Analysis- psychology- has failed to account for large defective shifts in the accomoditative aspects of analysis,primarily, because of the increasing rate of change of the perimeters of the accelerating social change.

Therefore, the behavioris connected Skinnerian revolution as effected by a shift toward utilitarian principles, developed a causal ambiguity, as t whether which caused which? Did the use and utility go hand in hand in the developmental shift toward a calculus of inter-casual relationship between principles and their social-psychological effects? Or, I'd the principles of the deterministic relationships of societal-psychological movements cause the emergence of utility, use and spatial determinants? (Per Freud, Levin)

The fact that behaviorism displaced an unsuccessful psych-analysis, shows that the defensive posture of a displacement- failed to account for the shift as a socially determined movement, therefore the model of dynamic economy behind it makes much more sense.

Within the complex of defenses, denial is a cousin of displacement, as that which is placed elsewhere, (to the less then conscious) , becomes targeted at places of the weakest territory. Th weakness in the model of economic accountability as the major mover of social change, thus denies it first, because of institutionalized preference and prejudice, then such denial undermines the models-mathematical and spatial, protecting itself while destroying their underlying models.

Functional shifts are replaced by pragmatic ones, as a matter of effective political world view, and the last defensive program leads to rationalism per se.

Hence the circle is complete, the failure of analysis is prone to the charge of lack of insight, and the bypass from pre-figurative modeling to post modern spatial relationship is are accounted for in other ways.

Lack of effect brought analysis is replaced by lack of affect and although tree are certain credible notions connecting gross societal changes such as alienation-
for instance 'The Otsider', is a cultural phenomenon, displacement, fails to account for it in other than peripheral, patent ways, the culminative effect , is a discontinuing relationship with the cause. The total effect is the trend toward the failure of defensive structures, and the reductive shift toward the more primary defenses tending to displacement, within the literal , economic meaning of the word.

This is why mass exodus from places like Syria can be interpreted as the regressive psychological economical movements, based on anti-analytical, anti-psychological movements. The shift away from the person, the identity, the nation-hood, is the result.

It is at once, an individual flight away from its own raisin d'etre, the flight from the self, which analysis can not resolve. Therefore, the reversion to spatial determinants in economy, and utalization, can no longer be micro managed, it has lost its contact with structural basis,and social programs of control become the only way to deal with them.

This loss of traditional seem, does lead to occasional anarchic examples of outburst, and unfounded realizations of what behind the disassociated analysis, the vagrant always escaping from himself, does not understand why he is always on the move, from place to place, he leaves to leave himself behind, fearful to stay, lest his displacements ill ventually sink in the fact that he had lost control f himself to manipulation of the virtual of the real.

This is why, economy is moving a primary, regressed view of a basic, economic , spatially and literally determined social-psychology.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby CelineK » Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:57 pm

Arminius wrote:Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychology?

HAHAH: The root of all economics is power, control, manipulation, profit, and exploitation. We really need to address that.


The fatal flaws of sociology and psychology is that they tend to address or focus on things very dogmatically which is why both are ineffective until the lens of morality along with authority are removed. Both systems of thought largely exist by making appeals to authority.


And explains more than philosophy by the same token. IMHO

YES... it is kinda frightening to see people follow the money, competing for the doom of mankind... and who are unable to take responsibility for it. There is nothing more irrational than repeating the same mistakes over and over and expecting different results. Competing to death eventually leads to the death of competition, and exposes the hoax that is psychology.


China Meltdown Triggering Worldwide Recession
Kedar Grandhi, ICH, reports “Albert Edwards, a strategist at Société Générale bank, has warned of an impending global financial crisis similar to the one that occurred in 2008-09. This time, he said, it could lead to the collapse of the Eurozone.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/03/09 ... recession/

'China To Spark Global Financial ICE AGE With Depression Sending Markets Crashing By 75%'
http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/6 ... hing-by-75
The Laws Of Light, Emotions And Sexuality. http://www.celinek.net The time has come in the history of man's journey from his material jungle to his spiritual mountain top when it is imperative that he must live more and more in the cosmic Light universe of knowing, and less in the electric wave universe of sensing -- Walter Russell.
=============================================================
A Money-Free Society Is Now Reality! The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth and not to fall under the will or legislative authority of man but only have the law of nature (immutable principles) for his rule. Samuel Adams. -- http://www.earthcustodians.net
User avatar
CelineK
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:37 pm
Location: No Man's Land In A Money-Free Wold

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Tue Mar 22, 2016 11:53 am

The following problem can also be better explained and better solved by economics:

Arminius wrote:What if we have no chance anymore to get out of the rationality trap in which collective rationality and individual rationality are in conflict?

Arminius wrote:At last the tragedy of the commons leads to the extinction of those who work or contribute otherwise and support those who do not work or do not contribute otherwise and do not supprt anybody, although the latter have own children and the former not. So those who have offspring survive as long as they can have offspring, and the others who have no offspring die out. So it is worthwhile in a commons to be lazy, if a certain number of members is not lazy. But it is to be expected that more and more members of the group will behave lazy and group earnings will fall further, since - morally spoken - a typical human maxim is not the maximization of the own advantage but the avoidance of the own disadvantage. So the tragedy of the commons escalates and escalates, and the whole group gets into a rationality trap in which collective rationality and individual rationality are in conflict. In addition to the rationality trap that I just described, there is also the opposite case in which common resources are increasingly exhausted. In this way, not only many environmental problems, but, interestingly, the population explosion in many countries can be explained. The Neomalthusianist Garret Hardin believed that a liberal access to public goods will at last be the ruin of all. Therefore he called for corresponding restrictions.
Arminius wrote:
Garret Hardin wrote:Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all.

The tragedy of the commons means an evolutionary suicide.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby James S Saint » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:09 pm

Money is the result of the effort to quantize, document, and manipulate power.
Economics is the study of social influence via money.

The affectance underlying all economics is the psychology of PHT - Perception of Hope and Threat (positive and negative charged influence/affectance).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25428
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Tue Mar 22, 2016 12:23 pm

James S Saint wrote:Money is the result of the effort to quantize, document, and manipulate power.
Economics is the study of social influence via money.

The affectance underlying all economics is the psychology of PHT - Perception of Hope and Threat (positive and negative charged influence/affectance).

Economicis is both subordinated and superordinated. It depends on to what and whom. Economics can both affect and be affected.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Eric_The_Pipe » Tue Mar 22, 2016 5:46 pm

Arminius wrote:Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychology?
Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources. If you do not have a scarcity, Economics does not have anything to say about it. (Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden had no reason to understand Economics.) Everything else falls form that. It does not explain sociology, nor psychology, instead it looks at reality from a different angle. Like a set of glasses that make the view clearer, but at times can make it more difficult, like wearing someone else's glasses, or attempting to see a cell with a telescope. It is connected to Sociology and Psychology, because our society and our minds grew in a scarce environment.

As a person who is studying Economics in College, but who started out looking at a lot of chemistry books, there is a scary amount of parallels between Microeconomics, and Chemistry.

Now, Witchcraft, or Macroeconomics as some call it, was created by a mathematician, who at most had two economics classes in his whole life. It shows. Macro is amazingly mathematical, and in the same sense very separated from reality (note, all economic arguments for communism and socialism are macro arguments).

Economics attempts to use math to understand not just humans (which is simply its most common application) but nature and reality. Economic physics, Economic Biology, Economic Psychology are slowly becoming focuses because, they are a specific application of the two things. Expect more of this.

Econometrics is a hell of a lot of fun, and what every fucking sociologist and psychologist uses for any broad social trend.

The people we should all hate is political scientists... The bastards... ;-p (Note: no reason given, nor will any be provided.)
“Give a man a fish and he will ask for tartar sauce and French fries! Moreover, some politician who wants his vote will declare all these things to be among his ‘basic rights’” – An old saying rewritten by a follower of Thomas Sowell

"It's true that the bastards would win. But we shouldn't shut down a system just because the bastards win. A good system should be like a hamster wheel for bastards hooked up an electric generator. A well designed system is not one that prevents bastards from winning, but one that generates a lot of positive externalities from bastards trying to beat each other. And that's exactly what markets do. Markets entice bastards, they reward bastards, and the bastards love them, but as they operate they generate a lot of good that inadvertently benefits everyone else." - Carleas

The Newest EconPop: Economics of Demolition Man

The man, Thomas Sowell: Wealth, Poverty and Politics

Sowell's Writing
User avatar
Eric_The_Pipe
Thinker
 
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby CelineK » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:08 pm

As a person who is studying Economics in College, but who started out looking at a lot of chemistry books


good, but do you see the problem with Keynesianism, the model of world banking destroying the planet and billionaires being just fine about it.

By a continuing process of inflation, government can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose."
John Maynard Keynes
The Laws Of Light, Emotions And Sexuality. http://www.celinek.net The time has come in the history of man's journey from his material jungle to his spiritual mountain top when it is imperative that he must live more and more in the cosmic Light universe of knowing, and less in the electric wave universe of sensing -- Walter Russell.
=============================================================
A Money-Free Society Is Now Reality! The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth and not to fall under the will or legislative authority of man but only have the law of nature (immutable principles) for his rule. Samuel Adams. -- http://www.earthcustodians.net
User avatar
CelineK
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:37 pm
Location: No Man's Land In A Money-Free Wold

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Mictlantecuhtli » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:12 pm

Economics is the prime mover of society where psychology and sociology merely explains the behavioral implications of its effects.
Civilization is a ship of fools headed to a one way destination of catastrophe and annihilation, its many captains populated by asshole-idiots that all agree it is unsinkable.

Image
User avatar
Mictlantecuhtli
Nihilistic Mystic And Hermit
 
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:31 am
Location: Concrete Wilderness.

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Mictlantecuhtli » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:17 pm

Arminius:
Economics is not the number one. Economicis is subordinated but also superordinated. It depends on to what and whom.



I can agree with that.
Civilization is a ship of fools headed to a one way destination of catastrophe and annihilation, its many captains populated by asshole-idiots that all agree it is unsinkable.

Image
User avatar
Mictlantecuhtli
Nihilistic Mystic And Hermit
 
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:31 am
Location: Concrete Wilderness.

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Mictlantecuhtli » Wed Mar 23, 2016 8:18 pm

Eric_The_Pipe wrote:
Arminius wrote:Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychology?
Economics is the study of the use of scarce resources. If you do not have a scarcity, Economics does not have anything to say about it. (Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden had no reason to understand Economics.) Everything else falls form that. It does not explain sociology, nor psychology, instead it looks at reality from a different angle. Like a set of glasses that make the view clearer, but at times can make it more difficult, like wearing someone else's glasses, or attempting to see a cell with a telescope. It is connected to Sociology and Psychology, because our society and our minds grew in a scarce environment.

As a person who is studying Economics in College, but who started out looking at a lot of chemistry books, there is a scary amount of parallels between Microeconomics, and Chemistry.

Now, Witchcraft, or Macroeconomics as some call it, was created by a mathematician, who at most had two economics classes in his whole life. It shows. Macro is amazingly mathematical, and in the same sense very separated from reality (note, all economic arguments for communism and socialism are macro arguments).

Economics attempts to use math to understand not just humans (which is simply its most common application) but nature and reality. Economic physics, Economic Biology, Economic Psychology are slowly becoming focuses because, they are a specific application of the two things. Expect more of this.

Econometrics is a hell of a lot of fun, and what every fucking sociologist and psychologist uses for any broad social trend.

The people we should all hate is political scientists... The bastards... ;-p (Note: no reason given, nor will any be provided.)



And an environment of scarcity has behavior consequences and effects.
Civilization is a ship of fools headed to a one way destination of catastrophe and annihilation, its many captains populated by asshole-idiots that all agree it is unsinkable.

Image
User avatar
Mictlantecuhtli
Nihilistic Mystic And Hermit
 
Posts: 7202
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 1:31 am
Location: Concrete Wilderness.

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Eric_The_Pipe » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:26 am

CelineK wrote:
As a person who is studying Economics in College, but who started out looking at a lot of chemistry books


good, but do you see the problem with Keynesianism, the model of world banking destroying the planet and billionaires being just fine about it.

By a continuing process of inflation, government can confiscate, secretly and unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citizens. By this method they not only confiscate, but they confiscate arbitrarily; and, while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose."
John Maynard Keynes

I see many problems with Keynesian Economics, but I'll point out that even the Keynesians don't go along with everything he said any more... "We are none of us Keynesian any more." -Milton Friedman.

Inflation is one of the easiest ways to raise taxes without having to ask for permission... And that is just the tip...
“Give a man a fish and he will ask for tartar sauce and French fries! Moreover, some politician who wants his vote will declare all these things to be among his ‘basic rights’” – An old saying rewritten by a follower of Thomas Sowell

"It's true that the bastards would win. But we shouldn't shut down a system just because the bastards win. A good system should be like a hamster wheel for bastards hooked up an electric generator. A well designed system is not one that prevents bastards from winning, but one that generates a lot of positive externalities from bastards trying to beat each other. And that's exactly what markets do. Markets entice bastards, they reward bastards, and the bastards love them, but as they operate they generate a lot of good that inadvertently benefits everyone else." - Carleas

The Newest EconPop: Economics of Demolition Man

The man, Thomas Sowell: Wealth, Poverty and Politics

Sowell's Writing
User avatar
Eric_The_Pipe
Thinker
 
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Eric_The_Pipe » Thu Mar 24, 2016 6:26 am

HaHaHa wrote:And an environment of scarcity has behavior consequences and effects.
True.
“Give a man a fish and he will ask for tartar sauce and French fries! Moreover, some politician who wants his vote will declare all these things to be among his ‘basic rights’” – An old saying rewritten by a follower of Thomas Sowell

"It's true that the bastards would win. But we shouldn't shut down a system just because the bastards win. A good system should be like a hamster wheel for bastards hooked up an electric generator. A well designed system is not one that prevents bastards from winning, but one that generates a lot of positive externalities from bastards trying to beat each other. And that's exactly what markets do. Markets entice bastards, they reward bastards, and the bastards love them, but as they operate they generate a lot of good that inadvertently benefits everyone else." - Carleas

The Newest EconPop: Economics of Demolition Man

The man, Thomas Sowell: Wealth, Poverty and Politics

Sowell's Writing
User avatar
Eric_The_Pipe
Thinker
 
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:06 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby CelineK » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:47 pm

Eric_The_Pipe wrote:I see many problems with Keynesian Economics, but I'll point out that even the Keynesians don't go along with everything he said any more... "We are none of us Keynesian any more." -Milton Friedman.

Inflation is one of the easiest ways to raise taxes without having to ask for permission... And that is just the tip...


refreshing to see somebody on here who can understand the pitfalls of Keynesianism. On here or elsewhere. I find discussing economics with people who cannot comprehend 'inflation' (hidden tax, sure) nerve raking, to be honest, and considering what awaits the planet around the corner.

Never read friedman, just aware of his reputation, but von mise, hayek, rothbard,
The Laws Of Light, Emotions And Sexuality. http://www.celinek.net The time has come in the history of man's journey from his material jungle to his spiritual mountain top when it is imperative that he must live more and more in the cosmic Light universe of knowing, and less in the electric wave universe of sensing -- Walter Russell.
=============================================================
A Money-Free Society Is Now Reality! The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth and not to fall under the will or legislative authority of man but only have the law of nature (immutable principles) for his rule. Samuel Adams. -- http://www.earthcustodians.net
User avatar
CelineK
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:37 pm
Location: No Man's Land In A Money-Free Wold

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:59 pm

HaHaHa wrote:
Arminius:
Economics is not the number one. Economicis is subordinated but also superordinated. It depends on to what and whom.

I can agree with that.
HaHaHa wrote:Economics is the prime mover of society where psychology and sociology merely explains the behavioral implications of its effects.

I can agree with that.

:)
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby Arminius » Thu Mar 24, 2016 8:34 pm

Eric_The_Pipe wrote:I see many problems with Keynesian Economics, but I'll point out that even the Keynesians don't go along with everything he said any more... "We are none of us Keynesian any more." -Milton Friedman.

Inflation is one of the easiest ways to raise taxes without having to ask for permission... And that is just the tip...

Yes, but I remind you of the historical fact that Keynes was not the absolute winner of the Bretton Woods monetary conference. So the Bretton Woods system does not merely mean Keynesianism.

Image
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Can economics explain more than sociology or/and psychol

Postby CelineK » Fri Mar 25, 2016 1:07 am

Image

planet broken beyond repair... stable financial system??
The Laws Of Light, Emotions And Sexuality. http://www.celinek.net The time has come in the history of man's journey from his material jungle to his spiritual mountain top when it is imperative that he must live more and more in the cosmic Light universe of knowing, and less in the electric wave universe of sensing -- Walter Russell.
=============================================================
A Money-Free Society Is Now Reality! The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth and not to fall under the will or legislative authority of man but only have the law of nature (immutable principles) for his rule. Samuel Adams. -- http://www.earthcustodians.net
User avatar
CelineK
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:37 pm
Location: No Man's Land In A Money-Free Wold

PreviousNext

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]