There are models economists make to describe what they think is really going on, and there are models they make to explore neat ideas.
— Noah Smith (@Noahpinion) October 9, 2014
My question to you fine folk, are both types of models useful? If so how?
]]>]]>Pundits want equal status to econs, hence the argument MT @ModeledBehavior enough w/ claims that econ unscientific http://t.co/2rDxQOKyRj …
— Ryan Decker (@UpdatedPriors) September 28, 2014
]]>The language of economics often treats people as commodities: the phrases “representative agent” and “human capital” are examples of this. Sometimes these phrases are useful abstractions, but they also contribute to the sometimes pernicious indifference of mainstream economics to issues of justice. Piketty’s take on human capital might make us a little less indifferent.
Speaking of circle-jerking: "Their [economists] public arguments have an incestuous yet masturbatory quality that is exhausting to follow."
— Trixie (@HaikuCharlatan) September 23, 2014
Ummm, hmmm. Anyone able to translate this?
]]>Martin Wolf on humility and economics, from a Q&A at Vox about his new book (http://t.co/s5Z2brNauU)… pic.twitter.com/kvKHpYnhBs
— Cardiff Garcia (@CardiffGarcia) September 12, 2014
Still, I obviously agree with the quote given how I’ve described it – what are your thoughts?
]]>I used to think I hated just economists due to their arrogance, the arrogance of knowing about the social and economic world. It turns out I hate everyone as, as everyone seems to believe they know how the world works and how to fix it.
It is a general sentiment (around knowledge) that I agree with – although the hatred is unnecessary. In truth, my view is that it is undue confidence about our own folk model of the economy/society is part of human nature – accepting we know a lot less, and trying to make our statements around policy transparent and testable, would be neat things. In my view this is what good “economics” involves.
]]>Discuss: Wearables and the quantified self will turn real life into one giant MMORPG.
— Christopher Mims (@mims) September 7, 2014
Given my Garmin watch which syncs to Strava and Runtastic, and my Fitbit pedometer that sits on the other arm – and the fact that I connect these to MyFitnessPal where I log my food via my cellphone, I sort of see where he is coming from. I love my shiny online badges. Furthermore, I believe there is a term for this type of behavioural effect (which acts both as incentive and a form of precommitment depending on its design) – gamification.
]]>
Just to kick you off, I’d say it definitely relates to both of these posts.
]]>
Economists don’t have universal truths, which is why I can’t understand how it is called a science. Without those universal truths all you can expect is opinions.
Questions:
- Does science have universal truths?
- Is it true that without universal truths all we have are opinions?
- If 2 is true, then is it a lost cause – or perhaps is there a mechanism that makes some “opinions” relatively more valid/persuasive/closer to “truth”
Note: I hope one of the other bloggers will cover off the National and Labour policy announcements – as I haven’t had any time to look at them at all – *wink wink*. If it doesn’t happen during the week, I’ll see if I can manage something in the future.
]]>U know what economists will be replaced by in next 10 yrs?
Data Scientists!
Trust me on that.
Thoughts?
]]>