/sci/ - Science & Math

>>>/pol/

>>5343351
They're too stupid.

That's not the correct definition of the multiplier at all.

>thinking k is constant either within a system or across different industries/situation

lel

>>5343362
Then what is?

>>5343367
shit's on wikipedia, just look it up.

>>5343345
Currently, the world market does NOT run on a keynsian-style economic model. Most nations have a more austrian economic model, though in the past 20 years the two have been used together.

>libertarian socialism with strong central govt all the way for me

>Most nations have a more austrian economic model
>I was only pretending to be retarded

Do you even have the slightest clue what austrian economics is? Is there any country in the world with a sound currency that constantly deflates? No.

>>5343375
>>libertarian socialism with strong central govt all the way for me
Enjoy your poverty then.

>>5343394
Which EU members are weathering this shit storm? Oh right, Scandinavia.

>>>/pol/

>>5343375
>Most nations have a more austrian economic model
>he thinks austrian economics is anything except but crackpot ramblings

>>5343396

>Scandis

That's just norway

and that's because they' keep themselves away from those other idiots and have oil to exploit

>>5343410
I don't think he meant that as a compliment.

>>5343375
> austrian economics
> economics
choose 1, they can't even into math, take your philosophy to >>>/pol/

>>>5343396
>Oh right, Scandinavia.
Haha yeah the ones not in the EURO. The ones with sound money and mostly free markets.
>but they have higher taxes
http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5616.aspx

>>5343410
>butthurt because they predicted every economic collapse and the great depression
>b-b-but world war 2 got us out of it
>>5343414
>trying to use "math" to predict human behavior

Also austrian economics does use math, only when necessary. Enjoy your pseudoscience.

>>5343390
>>5343410
>>5343414
OK, perhaps "Chicago school" would be more accurate...

You do realize that we are running a free market system, and that we have had massive deregulation in almost all nations after 1970?

>no deflation

like I said, most nations currently run a mix between free-market and government planned style systems. We hardly have extremes anymore...

>>5343394
>>5343396
>clearly do not understand what libertarian socialism is
libertarian socialism, as an economic policy, is not having currency and private land ownership.

>>5343438
> guys its so complicated
> > fuck it, we're doing science
economics, physics, computer science, psychology, sociology, game theory...

> guys it's so complicated
> > muh freedom
austrian economics

>>5343446
>You do realize that we are running a free market system, and that we have had massive deregulation in almost all nations after 1970?
Yupp, the complete opposite of reality is true. Keep being a liar.

Just ignore ALL of the economic controls, massive inflation and corporate fascism that resulted.

They sure got you right where they want you.

>like I said, most nations currently run a mix between free-market and government planned style systems.
Austrian economics is sound money, which means a deflationary economy, not an inflationary one, the people's money isn't extracted and given to wall street bankers in austrian economics

>>5343453
<span class="math">\mathbf{I}[/spoiler] I'm promoting neither Keynesian nor Austrian economics. I'm really more of a communist.
<span class="math">\mathbf{II}[/spoiler] Resulted from what? Who got me where? You're not really making sense, and your infographic doesn't account for population growth and other factors, even if that were a good indicator of the amount of regulation of an economy.

>>5343448
>economics, physics, computer science, psychology, sociology, game theory...
That's basically what austrian economics is. Most liberals don't even believe in evolution and think "we're all social constructs". Socialism is the creation science of economics.

>>5343446
>libertarian socialism
A contradiction in terms, it's authoritarian.

>>5343375
>implying there's any underlying philosophy or thought model behind economic policies

For states, it's always spending, all the time. There is always next election, after all.

>>5343468
> [list of sciences]
> That's basically what austrian economics is
mysteriously most scientists are liberal

> most liberals don't
shut up dude, take your retarded shit to pol or x or something

>>5343468
>That's basically what austrian economics is.
No it's fucking not. Austrian economics rejects the idea that you can apply models to human behavior in the way that psychology and sociology does.

>>5343466
>I'm really more of a communist.
Oh boy, even more of a retard.

Call me anything you want, everyone else thinks you're million times more retarded than I am, enjoy your mysticism and labour theory of value.

>Resulted from what?
Economic controls, corporatism, central banking resulted in the giant mess we're in today. America and europe.

>and your infographic doesn't account for population growth and other factors
It doesn't have to. They're unrelated.

>>5343473
>mysteriously most scientists are liberal
Because the university industrial complex is liberal, because they're reacting against retarded christian conservatives.

Libertarians are the most intelligent political group and there's data supporting this.

>shut up dude, take your retarded shit to pol or x or something
>believes in this
>tells me to go to /x/

>>5343475
>Austrian economics rejects the idea that you can apply models to human behavior in the way that psychology and sociology does.
Lol no it doesn't, how hard can you strawman?

>>5343468

I refer to myself as a libertarian socialist only as far as I believe that currency and private property should be abolished. I do not agree with the anti-authoritarian portion of this philosophy. In fact, my views on authority are almost Stalinist. I think that the government should have the right to execute people who abuse the system or who are incapable of contributing to society. But it's a balance. Ideally, people would get all their basic needs from within their community, and the government would assist the distribution of the remaining goods. ie, small-scale farming and energy production for residential areas, but larger-scale manufacturing and larger-scale power for industrial areas. I haven't quite worked the perfect balance out yet, but I'm getting there.

>>5343491
>Lol no it doesn't, how hard can you strawman?
you seem to be unacquainted with your own theory
>The belief that the use of economic models and statistical methods to model economic behavior are a flawed, unreliable, and insufficient means of analyzing economic behavior and evaluating economic theories.[2][6]
>The belief that testability in economics and consistently accurate mathematical modeling of an economic market are impossible because mathematical modeling of any real market affects the decision-makers in that market and "testing" relies on real human actors who cannot be placed in a lab setting without altering their would-be actions.[2][6]

>>5343491
> Libertarians are the most intelligent political group and there's data supporting this.
b-but humans are too complex to draw any conclusions from

>>5343496
>>5343480
And yes, I know I'm a crackpot, but I disagree with the retard label.

>>5343345
Here are the facts from an economics phd student. Take them as you will

1. Keyne's work was not very coherent even by the standards of his day.

2. Nonetheless most modern economists agree he had important insights.

3. The majority (though maybe not all) of modern economists agree that all of Keyne's insights that were valid have been incorporated into modern economics in what is called "neo-Keynsian" macro.

4. Because of this, there is no need for anyone to call themselves a Keynesian. Neither is there any need to turn to Keynes original work, either to defend or attack neo-Keynsianism.

5. The one exception is that Larry Summers has his own take on Keynsianism that is somewhat divorced from modern macro.

ITT: People who claim to adhere to belief systems they don't understand.

Also:
>mfw soziale Marktwirtschaft

>>5343510
correction, it was Robert Schiller not Larry Summers

>>5343496
>I refer to myself as a libertarian socialist only as far as I believe that currency and private property should be abolished.
That's great let's abolish that which makes our lives easier.

>In fact, my views on authority are almost Stalinist. I think that the government should have the right to execute people who abuse the system or who are incapable of contributing to society.
Not if society rounds up wastes such as yourself and does the same.

As a long time /sci/fag, please leave this board and never return.

>I haven't quite worked the perfect balance out yet, but I'm getting there.
Because you know whats best for people. It must suck having been beaten as a child.

>>5343497
That does not mean we don't use neuroscience, psychology, sociology and yes math in our work.
Strawman more.

>>5343541
How many equations in your favorite book extolling austrian models? Oh wait, austrians don't use models.

>>5343530
Well, actually, I'd probably be executed in my own system, because I'm so damn lazy XD

Otherwise, you present nothing else worth noting in your post. Bravo.

>>5343541

Give an example then.

>>5343545
>XD
So edgy
>Otherwise, you present nothing else worth noting in your post.

What about the fact that money emerged because it benefited society? It's incredible people don't understand this.

North korea sure is great this time of year. Maybe you should go there, they abolished currency.

>>5343541
>That does not mean we don't use neuroscience, psychology, sociology and yes math in our work.
Yes it does. If you're doing those things, you've abandoned austrian economics.

Which places you on the fringe of the fringe.

>>5343556
> What about the fact that money emerged because it benefited society?
society is too complicated to reason about or understand

you can't explain that

>>5343544
A lot less because it's not needed nearly as much.

>OUR MATH ACCURATELY DESCRIBES REALITY
Keynesianism is like time cube math.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube

>>5343564
>society is too complicated to reason about or understand
Which is why the market should be as free as possible.

>>5343562
>Yes it does. If you're doing those things, you've abandoned austrian economics.
But that's wrong. Human action comes from neuroscience.

>>5343569
> u can't knowww!!!
> therefore
therefore nothing, you can't conclude anything, you fail at math, science, and basic fucking logic, get the fuck out of my motherfucking /sci/

>>5343556
lel, Nations will not be self-supporting. I think I'll move to Venezuela sometime after college, if the socialist regime there persists. There do in fact exist people who would agree with me on these issues, you know.
>benefited society
quantify that.

>>5343567
>Keynesianism is like time cube math.
BOOMROASTED

>>5343556
>North korea sure is great this time of year. Maybe you should go there, they abolished currency.

What? No, they didn't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korean_won

>>5343581
>therefore nothing, you can't conclude anything
That's my fucking point. Neither can you.

Get out of MY /sci/.


>>5343588

Enjoy, your stockholm syndrome then silly statist.

>There do in fact exist people who would agree with me on these issues, you know.
Yes but they have brain damage.

>quantify that.
Division of labour and markets allowed for a gigantic abundance of resources which let people have shorter working days, significantly longer lifespans and a high standard of living.
Enjoy your lack of production.

>2012
>not DSGE

>>5343491
sorry for your autism

>>5343663
>That's my fucking point.
That wasn't you point. Your point was a non sequitur as anon pointed out. Neo-keynesian economics however has been the model that is most consistent with reality. As long as econ is not rigorous, this is the best any model can do.
>Yes but they have brain damage
"Academia disagrees with me on every issue almost unanimously. Hence, I'm a genius." You're going to like /pol/ much better than /sci/
>Division of labour and markets allowed for a gigantic abundance of resources which let people have shorter working days, significantly longer lifespans and a high standard of living.
When everything else fails, you can rely on Austrians to pretend their fringe ideology is the only one that promotes capitalism.


I'm not the socialist dickhead, the bullshit left libertarian or the Stalinist you were arguing with btw.

>>5343717
>Neo-keynesian economics however has been the model that is most consistent with reality.
Bahahaha, enjoy printing money and thinking it creates real resources you fascist.

>"Academia disagrees with me on every issue almost unanimously. Hence, I'm a genius."
Academia is mostly retarded "gender is a social construct, evolution doesn't apply to humans" lol

Studies have shown time and time again libertarians are the most intelligent political group. Google it.

>When everything else fails, you can rely on Austrians to pretend their fringe ideology is the only one that promotes capitalism.
>he thinks neo-keynesian economics promotes capitalism when it's all they teach in today's universities

>>5343717
libertarian socialist has nothing to do with libertarianism or socialism, really. It's just a name. And I'm not a Stalinist, I just compared my views on authority to his purging policy.

>>5343375
I don't think you understand what libertarian socialism is. It is more akin to anarcho-communism than what you are proposing.

>>5343761
What would you call what I am proposing

>>5343754
>libertarian socialist has nothing to do with libertarianism or socialism, really

That's completely wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

>>5343784
>>5343375
>strong central government

tea party are libertarian/thread

>>5343747
>Bahahaha, enjoy printing money
I already do.
>you fascist
Oh, you.
>Academia is mostly retarded
"Ah got up an' ah toald dat teachin' lady..."
>"gender is a social construct,"
It is. Sex isn't. And I'm not one of these third-wave feminists or Atheism+ asshats.
>evolution doesn't apply to humans
You know as much about biology as you do about economics. And if consider your statement to be even an approximate representation of the academic consensus, you haven't read a paper on any related issue in your lifetime.
>Studies have shown time and time again libertarians are the most intelligent political group
Is it one of those studies that prove that liberals are the most compassionate or one of those that prove that conservatives are most honest? In either case, >>>/pol/
>he thinks neo-keynesian economics promotes capitalism
and I'm right, regardless of your conspiracy theories

Got to /pol/. That board was created as a zoo for the 'muh happening' crowd

brb, uni (it's morning in fascist Europe).

>>5343812
>I already do.
I should have said enjoy your poverty instead.

>"Ah got up an' ah toald dat teachin' lady..."
>muh monopoly on education is best because we silence all critics, it's good to know we're objective

>It is. Sex isn't.
Lol yeah, don't try to play middle ground here, you're still retarded.

>And if consider your statement to be even an approximate representation of the academic consensus
Have you been on tumblr?

>Is it one of those studies
Several have been done.

So yeah but do you have anything to say about the picture I posted?

>>5343784
You're proposing rounding up handicapped people because they can't produce and killing them.

>>5343801
>implying lack of teeth and education means they are not intelligent

>>5343852
Well, yes, actually.

But I guess I'm just looking for a name. What do you call that?

>>5343862
Being a sociopath with brain damage?

>>5343868
This.

Given that they benefit society at least as much as bankers economists deserve to be treated similarly.

>>5343847

Not him, but:
>It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like; but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this, the above would be better than nothing.

>>5343868
ok, some sociopaths are actually quite intelligent. Take Ted Kakzynski (or however you spell his last name). The "unibomber". Wrote a very detailed paper on boundary value problems, I believe...

>>5343873
So edgy.
Also stop confusing central bankers for actual investors/credit unions etc.

>>5343890
>ok, some sociopaths are actually quite intelligent. Take Ted Kakzynski (or however you spell his last name). The "unibomber". Wrote a very detailed paper on boundary value problems, I believe...
It doesn't mean they aren't a waste of atoms.

>>5343896
Disabled people are just as big of a waste as sociopaths. They should both be executed as soon as they are diagnosed.

>>5343902
>They should both be executed as soon as they are diagnosed.

>Mommy look how edgy I'm being

>>5343902
agreed, we cant let austistic assbergers retards cant breed

>>5343902
>Disabled people are just as big of a waste as sociopaths. They should both be executed as soon as they are diagnosed.

>>5343345
yes, this guy didnt understand the principle and also made some addition mistakes. EOT

>>5344026
like what?

>>5343902
There are plenty of sociopaths that can and do function in society. Just because a person doesn't feel empathy it doesn't mean that they are destined to become a murderous lunatic.

Did you even research socialism before you decided you were a socialist? Do you even understand what the title of "libertarian" implies? How are you this fucking stupid?

>>5343345
I'm not gonna read your thing because i'm too busy for this shit, but Keynes grossly overestimated the motivating value of economic incentives in regards to things like jobs, etc.

>>5343902
i dunno about that, but i do think mothers with downs babies should abort.

>>5343345
What do you mean is there anything wrong with the math? The fucking image shows you what's wrong with it.

>>5343375
libertarian socialism

Give a rich person more money:
>They use it for HFT which multiplies their money at the cost of inflation.
>They hide it in a tax haven.
>They stop working.
Give a poor person more money:
>They use it to buy more stuff and therefore improve the economy.
>They become able to give their children a better education.
>Lower incentives to become criminal.

>>5344418
b-but dey create da jobz

bump

>>5344418

Here is what I don't get. The poor people do not care about the rich people. Why should the rich care about the poor?

>inb4 it's the "right" thing to do.

No it's not. Poor people are just upset they were tricked into using a money system that is only as valuable as they think it is and then following it.

>>5344463

>Here is what I don't get. The poor people do not care about the rich people. Why should the rich care about the poor?

You are asking the wrong question. We should create a system that relies on one's generosity. That's not going to work. Pragmatically a poor person is more likely to reinvest the money in the economy and help society which is all we should care about.

>>5344486

shouldn't*

>>5344418
Well, the actual truth is in the middle.

America has benifitted the rich too much, especially recently, so for the American economy, you're right. The rich aren't going to invest the bulk of the money from a potential tax cut. They may have done so several tax cuts ago, but most money resulting from tax cuts will go into their pockets.
Similarly, give the poor a tax cut, and they'll go and buy more stuff. But give them too much, and instead of buying more stuff, they may start working less or shorter, or waste their money.

The trick is to balance income for the poorest between providing an incentive to work and an incentive to spend.
For the richest, the incentive to invest should be balanced with the incentive to pocket or 'waste' (bring abroad, buy and destroy resources like oil, etc.)
For the majority in between, the incentive to spend should be balanced with the incentive to work less or retire early.

>>5344486

>Pragmatically a poor person is more likely to reinvest the money in the economy and help society which is all we should care about.

Nope, they dont invest the money, they spend in on basic things which only serves to spend resources. It is the rich that mainly invest into things beyond basic human needs and that is what pushes the humanity forward.

> thread is still going
guise

>>5343747
>>Neo-keynesian economics however has been the model that is most consistent with reality.

You cant prove that statement, idiot. Not without showing how well can you swallow propaganda

>>5344672
> poison the well and beg the question in one fell swoop
impressive

>>5344672
see here:
>>5344422

>>5343847
You are the most obvious troll I've seen on /sci/ in ages

>being thinking SPENDING rather than savings creates economic growth

lol enjoy not having the resources to produce things

>>5343812 here. I'm back.
I don't want to resurrect this shitty thread, but in case some /pol/lacks are still lurking to see if I can respond, I'm going to offer a quick rebuttal and abandon the thread forever.
>>5343847
>muh monopoly on education is best because we silence all critics, it's good to know we're objective
You're the guy who called socialism the economic equivalent of creation "science". Well, yeah. But so is the Austrian "school," and to a much larger extent. And your argument shows that quite well. Academia doesn't silence critics or keep disquieting viewpoints out. That's what creationists claim when their espousal of the 'truth', revealed to Moses, is disregarded because none of it can be demonstrated via the scientific method. It's also what Austrians claim when their espousal of the the 'truth', revealed by Mises, is disregarded because none of it can be demonstrated via the scientific method. There is no conspiracy. You can publish. But you get laughed at if you do.
>Lol yeah, don't try to play middle ground here
This is why you should go to /pol/ and stay there. I didn't "play middle ground". You claimed gender wasn't social construct and I said the exact opposite. The second part of my statement wasn't conciliatory pandering. It was a challenge to your very mindset. When you say 'academia,' knowing that this institution almost unanimously disagrees with you, you equate it with everyone else who disagrees. You think /r/atheism is a representation of science. It isn't. I was trying to tell you that I'm arguing the science behind the bullshit labels you are intent on plastering everything with. I'm not a liberal. I'm just someone who prioritizes science over ideology. Which is something you don't do.
>Error: Field too long.
I'll be back.

[>>5346252 cont.]
>>5343847
>Have you been on tumblr?
No, last time I checked 'Nature' and 'Science' were the more esteemed fora for scientific publishing.
>Several have been done
Read my point again and see if this statement refutes it.
>So yeah but do you have anything to say about the picture I posted?
I refute every line of your post but you think that picture was just too chewy a crumpet for me? Oh well. Might as well rebut it while I'm being trolled: Your picture is as inane as your drivel. It tries to make the Austrian model seem more complex through (a) a bogus diagram that attempts to show the 'multidimensional' nature of Austrian economics and (b) verbose fluff. It tries to discredit mainstream economics by misrepresenting it. This is a basic introduction to what is used in reality:
http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~lchrist/course/Czech/lectureACEL_handout.pdf
And if you mean the picture with the Keynes quote: Even in that one quote, which, if it were wrong, wouldn't discredit mainstream economics, Keynes was right in principle.
And while I'm at it: The only thing that separates you from the stereotypical redditor is your viewpoint. They also support their points with infantile cartoons.
>>5344672
>You cant prove that statement, idiot. Not without showing how well can you swallow propaganda
If anyone could prove any of this mathematically, economics would be a respectable field. But empirical evidence (or propaganda, whichever you prefer) is the only thing econ has. And Austrians don't consider it evidence if it proves them wrong. While calling others "creation scientists."
>>5344763
>You are the most obvious troll I've seen on /sci/ in ages
And yet he got me to write three lengthy responses. Obvious troll is also successful.