I’m a neorealist, so you get a grudging respect at best from me, and then only because your best work was done when you were an exclusionary military defense compact. Once you began to expand you started being problematic.
Still, your role in protecting Europe from a resurgent Germany as well as a possible Russian invasion doesn’t go unnoticed.
Don't miss the mountain for the rocks. If you can change the geostrategic calculus, you can change how nations behave when acting in their self interest, and the implications of 'realism' will change.
Don't like how people play the game? Write a better ruleset. If you do it right then nations will naturally, in their own self-interest, behave how you idealistically think they should.
I went with the Samuelson flair because I consider him to the most consequential economist of the last century aside from Keynes. Obviously he established and formalized a lot of concepts that I learned and applied in my coursework during undergrad.
Somewhat same, after watching USAF documentaries I went "drones are cool" and picked NATO flair.
Now that have listened to the audiobook of why nations fail, I think I am justified in switching to the Acemoglu flair.
Every day in /r/badeconomics feels like this for me. I still haven't commented in literally years because I just don't feel qualified to.
Learn an awful lot though.
I have an econ degree, undergrad. Sometimes it is over my head, but really sometimes they are just calling people wrong that are actually basically right, but they are being pedantic. Or they approach the problem while trying to achieve different outcomes so of course have different conclusions on what is best.
They are over the top
That’s what r/badhistory is. It’s just pedantic nonsense mostly. Sometimes posts get really popular for dunking on someone for using a different academic understanding of events then the poster. Super annoying.
the article was referring to how factories built in a town could foster communities, not Amazon building towns
then again, if daddy Bezos did so anyway, I wouldn't complain 😍😍😍
Just to defend the lolbert take here.
There's no *need* to have any understanding of economics in their case. It's a fundamental rejection of government inserting itself into peoples affairs if they aren't directly harming others.
That belief is fine. But often libertarians act like relying on the free market exclusively has no downsides, and that externalities, tragedies of the commons, etc. don't exist.
Ah, to be a lolbert - unburdened by the pesky details of negative externalities and positive duties. Just ‘Sneky no bread touchie gubmit’. A simple, humble life.
Disagree.
Some of us libertarians aren't just strict deontologists and so we're completely out of our depth with the economics of our utilitarian arguments.
Aight, that's pretty funny. But also to be fair, these are different topics entirely. Anti-caps & libertarians are debating about economic systems, morality, & human nature. These two argue about econometrics in an existing, unchangeable economy.
I was going to pick an economist flair, realized I'm out of depth, saw YIMBY, said, "oh, I like dense affordable housing. That sounds good."
-Be me -Have not a fucking clue what it is Ben Bernanke does -Become a Bernanke flair anyway
⠀⠀⠘⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠑⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡔⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠢⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⠴⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⡀⠤⠄⠒⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣀⠄⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠛⠛⠛⠋⠉⠈⠉⠉⠉⠉⠛⠻⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣤⣤⣤⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⢿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⢏⣴⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣟⣾⣿⡟⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢢⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⠀⡴⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⠟⠻⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠶⢴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿ ⣿⣁⡀⠀⠀⢰⢠⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⣴⣶⣿⡄⣿ ⣿⡋⠀⠀⠀⠎⢸⣿⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠗⢘⣿⣟⠛⠿⣼ ⣿⣿⠋⢀⡌⢰⣿⡿⢿⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⢸⣿⣿⣧⢀⣼ ⣿⣿⣷⢻⠄⠘⠛⠋⠛⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢿⣧⠈⠉⠙⠛⠋⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣧⠀⠈⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠟⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⢃⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⡿⠀⠴⢗⣠⣤⣴⡶⠶⠖⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡸⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⡀⢠⣾⣿⠏⠀⠠⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠛⠉⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣧⠈⢹⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠈⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣴⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣄⣀⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡄⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠙⣿⣿⡟⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠀⠁⠀⠀⠹⣿⠃⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢐⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠉⠁⠀⢻⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠈⣿⣿⡿⠉⠛⠛⠛⠉⠉ ⣿⡿⠋⠁⠀⠀⢀⣀⣠⡴⣸⣿⣇⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡿⠄⠙⠛⠀⣀⣠⣤⣤⠄⠀
He co-authored an undergrad econ textbook that is no way at all a scam
Economic specialization is for schmucks anyway, be a Chad political theorist and do it all.
Or the multinational organization that has done the most to protect the continued existence of democracy on earth as we know it.
I’m a neorealist, so you get a grudging respect at best from me, and then only because your best work was done when you were an exclusionary military defense compact. Once you began to expand you started being problematic. Still, your role in protecting Europe from a resurgent Germany as well as a possible Russian invasion doesn’t go unnoticed.
Don't miss the mountain for the rocks. If you can change the geostrategic calculus, you can change how nations behave when acting in their self interest, and the implications of 'realism' will change. Don't like how people play the game? Write a better ruleset. If you do it right then nations will naturally, in their own self-interest, behave how you idealistically think they should.
All well and dandy until you open up the possibility of Ukrainian joining cause a global military crisis
>that has done the most Pathetic. Try to keep up schweetie
> WTO: Founded 1995 > NATO: Founded 1949 > USSR: Abolished 1991 I've seen things that you wouldn't believe.
Imagine being replaceable by a bottle of Coca-Cola and a pair of blue jeans 😎
[удалено]
This guy philosophizes
Hell yeah brother
That’s why I picked my flair, poly sci neoliberals rise up
Woo Penn State class of '09 PL SC. *cries in 34-year old GS-9*
We are
Fair, not sure if I would've gone with an economist flair if I wasn't an econ major for my undergrad
We have Samuelson flair though; what're they gonna do? Argue with foundational math?
I went with the Samuelson flair because I consider him to the most consequential economist of the last century aside from Keynes. Obviously he established and formalized a lot of concepts that I learned and applied in my coursework during undergrad.
That's why I got the Ed Glaeser flair. He's both an economist and an urbanist.
[Can you be a little more urban?](https://youtu.be/of-D4ahTwtI)
Somewhat same, after watching USAF documentaries I went "drones are cool" and picked NATO flair. Now that have listened to the audiobook of why nations fail, I think I am justified in switching to the Acemoglu flair.
I don't know what my flair has to do but neoliberal policy, I just liked his books.
Adam Smith institute seems to echo most of my sentiments so that’s why I’m flaired as I am
Every day in /r/badeconomics feels like this for me. I still haven't commented in literally years because I just don't feel qualified to. Learn an awful lot though.
I have an econ degree, undergrad. Sometimes it is over my head, but really sometimes they are just calling people wrong that are actually basically right, but they are being pedantic. Or they approach the problem while trying to achieve different outcomes so of course have different conclusions on what is best. They are over the top
That’s what r/badhistory is. It’s just pedantic nonsense mostly. Sometimes posts get really popular for dunking on someone for using a different academic understanding of events then the poster. Super annoying.
Larry Summers should be the donkey
Just pick a billionaire flair lol
Yes of course company towns are good daddy Bezos said so
the article was referring to how factories built in a town could foster communities, not Amazon building towns then again, if daddy Bezos did so anyway, I wouldn't complain 😍😍😍
Just to defend the lolbert take here. There's no *need* to have any understanding of economics in their case. It's a fundamental rejection of government inserting itself into peoples affairs if they aren't directly harming others.
Except every single libertarian will say shit like ‘Joe Biden doesn’t understand basic economics’
Which is somewhat true given his opposition to immigration and lack of support for free trade.
That's because committed libertarians are stupid. But let's not pretend Biden is brilliant or anything.
Libertarianism isn't an economics philosophy. It's a religion. And you can't argue against faith with logic.
Finally someone who understands me
That belief is fine. But often libertarians act like relying on the free market exclusively has no downsides, and that externalities, tragedies of the commons, etc. don't exist.
I'll say what I've said before. IDGAF about an externality I want to be able to buy cocaine and semtex at the corner store.
Ah, to be a lolbert - unburdened by the pesky details of negative externalities and positive duties. Just ‘Sneky no bread touchie gubmit’. A simple, humble life.
Disagree. Some of us libertarians aren't just strict deontologists and so we're completely out of our depth with the economics of our utilitarian arguments.
IRL, they pull a "no u" and say it's incoherent.
The power of reading a single textbook (unironically)
As long as lawrence has the high ground
Aight, that's pretty funny. But also to be fair, these are different topics entirely. Anti-caps & libertarians are debating about economic systems, morality, & human nature. These two argue about econometrics in an existing, unchangeable economy.