Re: mathematical intro to economics

From: Johnny Marcos (johnny5_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/01/04 

Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 20:49:49 GMT

Robert Vienneau <rvien@see.sig.com> wrote in news:rvien-
D84264.07062701072004@news.dreamscape.com:

>> For empirical proof throughout history what books do you suggest?
>
> Empirical proof of what?

All these new concepts - I am trying to absorb them - to pull order from
the chaos and from the order to pull meaning and purpose - if my
thoughts seem a jumble I apologize - it will take me some time to bring
order to the chaos.

Proof of successful economic policies in history - teaching theoretical
economics is good - but the model often times cannot simulate reality -
too many unknowns - I don't want to learn thoerized models at the start
- but through history we can learn what works and what does not -
history is better at showing what works in REALITY than many good models
do sometimes. So what books would you suggest that want to teach
economics that are thoroughly proven by historic examples and not open
to wide interpretations because things are vague or the models may be
lacking an effective simultion of the reality they are trying to copy -
is this even possible - am I still confusing you?

I am reading discussions on an unofficial paul krugman website and the
smart guys there can't seem to concur on what really stopped inflation
back in the 70's - fiscal controls or tax cuts.

> Books I find good on economic history include the three out of
> four books I've read in Eric Hobsbawm's "Age of" series. I
> liked Fernand Braudel's _Capitalism and Material Life_ and
> the secondary literature I've read on Braudel.

Thanks. Why do you choose these books over others? When I did my
undergrad at the university I got a textbook wrote by Hyman on economics
and really kinda breezed through the course - but from what I am seeing
on the net - that is not necessarily a good book. I want a good
foundation for the basics before I try to understand world events
through the eyes of an economist.

>> I
>> would like to study information based on evidence and not theory so I
>> can learn from the past
>
> I don't understand what that combination of words is supposed to
> mean.

Economics is an interesting thing to study - many things are theorized -
modeled - models based on mathematics or expected outcomes - I see
discussions going on here about minimum wages - aggregate demand -
velocity of money and credit - some of these concepts are new to me -
and people here cannot concur on the effects of some of these policies -
but it seems if you read enough history other peoples of other times
encountered these same problems and implemented policy and there were
effects of those implementations. I would rather learn from books were
identical problems were faced as today and the effects of thier policies
are examined than where we have modern economists teaching models
because they did not thoroughly study history and learn from previous
generations and they are not teaching from history but teaching from the
latest models. I guess I am trying to learn from books and economists
who are very well read in economic history and very well read in all the
schools of thought ever known in economics - why some things were good
in history and others were not and to be told why - some of the people I
talk too are not well read and neither am I and I don't know where to
start to get this depth and breadth other than the sources I have found
on the net.

>> - something that I can read as a dumb citizen
>> needing the concepts to be spelled out in the most laymen ways -
>> preferrably with lots of pretty pictures and bright colors and graphs
>> :-)
>
> I don't feel the need for such concessions myself. The books I
> mentioned have charts, but mostly words.

My time is short and my visual cortex occupies a large part of my
processing power. Showing me the color blue or a snow capped mountain
is much easier than trying to describe it in words to a blind man who
has never seen the color blue or a great mountain - how do you put that
into words without a frame of reference? If you want to teach to the
ignorant - go through the input devices man has evolved - much easier to
implant eyes into the blind man and show him the color blue than to
explain it to him through words - he may never comprehend that way. How
would you describe the color blue to a blind man?

>> What daily, weekly, or monthly information sources do you recommend
>> reading to keep up with modern economics - preferrably radio or tv
>> programs?
>
> Once again, the terms seem confused to me. "Modern economics" denotes
> an academic discipline to me.

I would like current unbiased information on daily economic policy on a
global and national scale - refined and processed to be pithy and
graphical. Watching CNBC doesn't seem to be cutting it - until just
recently I didn't even know the difference between one of thier
economists and another.

 Mainstream economics seems not to
> describe existing capitalist economies,

I am reading mises and what he says about germany in the 20's and it
seems to me we are following in those socialist footsteps today in
America - but with good economic policy we can stop that beast.

> One studies mainstream economics to understand the ruling ideas
> of the ruling classes,

I feel niether bush or kerry are really going to do much for me as an
individual.

 which then get refracted in more popular
> forums.
>

What are those besides sci.eco?

> You will not see much about "modern economics" on TV or the radio.

I have been told the financial times and the economist are good sources
of accurate unbiased information.

> idea. For example, in one recent year there was a flurry of articles
> about the empirical evidence demonstrating that individuals are not
> utility-maximizers.

Interesting, what I have read so far - mostly a little of mises -
socialism is a bad thing and leaving the power to decide how to allocate
resources in the individuals hands is the better system.

 I happen to have heard an interview with Jeff
> Sachs on NPR a few weeks ago. I think it was last year that Joseph
> Stiglitz called for the IMF to be abolished, since reforming it
> doesn't seem to be possible.

This would go along with what mises was claiming right - central control
of the allocation of resources is an in-efficient system?

> On the other hand, if you want to follow the course of the economy,
> many recommend the quality business press.

Some of my goals are to bring myself out of poverty and looking at
global trends and then national trends and going further down I hope to
make smart decisions based on good knowledge.

 For example, Business
> Week is supposed to be good, even though a cover story saying
> something is the next thing is often taken as a sure sign to sell.

HAHA! In my experience, relying on the media or popularity to educate
you where you need to invest is a sure sign of doom - even Isaac Newton
got sucked into a market bubble and lost money. Invest where there is
value and the popular trends of the madness of crowds will not harm you.

Once the funds have pushed thier billions into it or it makes the
mainstream media - it is time to sell. You have got to find those
undiscovered gems and ride them up the mountain of demand.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How Government Prolonged the Depression:Sovietization of History
    ... the winner gets to write the history. ... when economics is involved. ... Panic and Long Depression of 1873, Panic of 1893, Panic of 1907, Post WWI recession, the GD itself. ... What is at issue is the STUPID, FUCKING DEIFICATION OF FDR as the SAVIOR OF AMERICA, and the STUPID, FUCKING IDEA that pumping billions of our grandchildren's money into the economy is some sort of **solution** to a major market imbalance. ...
    (misc.invest.stocks)
  • Re: not just mortgages
    ... financial editor for the WSJ for like two decades who gave an overview of all the economic crap going back a couple of decades, and the Laffer stuff was great because politicians could "grasp" its "logic" without having to think very much. ... And, I'm finding that even history books don't tell all the story; you have to read economic history, bank history, labor history, sometimes biographies on some of the people, and you get even ... I remember reading one economics book and it had a short chapter on communism and what it all boiled down to was a set of _arguments_ that basically said: since it can't work, ...
    (sci.research.careers)
  • OT: Keynes and Krugman
    ... There are some that are actually interested in economics. ... History lesson for economists in thrall to Keynes ... Princeton economist Paul Krugman. ... our monetary policy and our fiscal policy, as the markets realize just what ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Discussion of Kolmogorov-based Prize for economic modeling
    ... The idea is to create a economics prize with a structure similar to the ... more general Hutter Prize for Lossless Compression of Human Knowledge: ... lossless compression of the economic history thereby represented, ...
    (sci.econ.research)
  • Re: tax rebate
    ... development in economics since 1936, ... Adam Smith, Karl Marx, and a classic paper by Keynes. ... You think I'm talking about fucking books? ... I have this intuition about how the economy works. ...
    (misc.writing)