Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Economics and politics should not overlap. I thought this was an intellectual improvement from Politics and Controversies, but it's the same divisive dialogue. SMH
I gave up on this forum several months ago, except maybe the investing sub-forum once in a while. I tried writing to the moderator several times about obvious violations of this forum's very purpose. But to no avail, the moderator poo-pooed me. So like in so many other spheres in this country nowadays, it seems that flouting the law and basic rules is okay, especially by those whose role, purportedly, is to ensure compliance with law and basic rules.
In this particular case, it's not so much a question of separating politics and economics as it is a question of language, knowing how to use the language of political economy without descending into petty politicking.
Many people on this the economics forum can't even distinguish between income and wealth, just for example.
I find it amusing that a poster would bother with any attempt to separate economics from politics, yes, CD should have a economics as theory forum for those who delight in sharing their immense wealth of knowledge regarding theoretical economics with the rest of us, but overall, I'd bet that most of CD posters know this would simply be a mutual admiration society at best. America has long been known to the rest of the world as a place where money meets power so why in the world would anyone decide to view it otherwise?
The economics professor for which I was a teaching assistant said something akin to that to me, in describing the work of he and his colleagues, when I was a graduate student thirty years ago. He called economics as theory "chicken scratches". And that was on the good days. (Yes, he convinced me to pursue a different, more practical specialization.)
Economics and politics should not overlap. I thought this was an intellectual improvement from Politics and Controversies, but it's the same divisive dialogue. SMH
You're kidding right?
Let's start with the basics. There are competing schools of economic thought. The reason for this is simple. Economics is not a science. The proponents of each economic school are armed with their own facts, figures, tables, and graphs to support their point of view and ignore those facts, figures, tables, and graphs that do not support their point of view. What's more, if it were a science, economics would have predictive capability.
Yet if you ask economists to predict what the economy is going to do over even the short term, you get unsatisfactory answers. Heck, in today's news, we've learned that the economy grew a measly 0.1% during the last quarter when economists had collectively predicted a 1.1% bump. Not much science going on there. In that sense, meteorology is a more precise science than economics. Hell, you could say that same about Tarot.
As a result you are dealing with gigantic gray areas, with economic performance being influenced by a host of factors from weather to legislation to some guy tinkering in his garage on the next world-shattering technological innovation. In turn, this means that the varying political camps will co-opt whichever economic theory most conforms to their worldview. That means the Democrats with their belief in the positive power of government are going to embrace Keynesianism, while the Republicans will take the opposite tack and embrace the Austrian school. So you'll have people such as Paul Krugman writing his column in the New York Times supporting his Keynesian viewpoint, never seeming to be deterred by the fact that he's yet to make a correct prediction.
So how do you actually separate economics from politics? You don't. Because economics is inherently political, not scientific.
Economics and politics should not overlap. I thought this was an intellectual improvement from Politics and Controversies, but it's the same divisive dialogue. SMH
How can they not overlap? Even our personal economies are affected by ridiculous taxes and lack of jobs strictly because of politicians.
If governments weren't so heavily involved in economies, then your statement would make sense. But since government policy and spending has a large impact economically, then it's inevitable that discussions will go in that direction.
I happen to agree with that. Government policy and the economy are intertwined as one effects the other and causes ripples on the other.
Economics and politics should not overlap. I thought this was an intellectual improvement from Politics and Controversies, but it's the same divisive dialogue. SMH
And it appears the same topics are posted by different people in different forums. IE: currently there's a thread here, and in automotive about Obama wanting more toll roads. It's as if there's a political play book telling trolls to post certain subject matter. I try to avoid these threads, but on occasion point out facts of how something may actually be misleading.
When the govt. is as involved in the economy as ours is, its impossible to separate the two.
Yes, it would actually be much better if the government were to stay out of the economy and stop trying to "stimulate" it which actually makes everything worse.
How do you propose that the government "stay out" of the economy? Are our elected representatives to Congress not "financed" by special economic interests? We have made our bed; and, now, we shall have a restless sleep in it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.