Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Max Keiser And Sandeep Jaitly Explain Why Modern Economics Is "rubbish"

Recommended Posts

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/max-keiser-and-sandeep-jaitly-explain-why-modern-economics-rubbish

One of Zero Hedge's recurring peeves with modern economics (at its basis, the flawed premise behind modern broken capital markets) is that modern economics, as taught by every Ivy League, and other, institution, and implemented by modern acolytes of Keynes and other spin off theories, is nothing but garbage: a sham voodoo science, which attempts to attribute an empirical basis to something which is inherently irrational. It is this irrationality that alternative, and thus non-mainstream, approaches to popular economics attempt to discredit, so far with zero success, as such a coup d'etat would mean an immediate end of the "status quo"TM which is for all intents and purposes the only thing that must be maintained in order for the wealthy to retain their wealth, and get far wealthier in the future (Paulson's 3 page blank check proposal to Congress was nothing but a band aid attempt to fix the cumlination of decades of Keynesian failure). The below attached interview between Max Keiser and Sandeep Jaitly provides a 3 minute, must watch glimpse into the basis of Austrian economics, although not through the lense of von Mises, but of Austrian founder Carl Menger, who founded the Austrian school on one axiom only: "value does not exist outside mankind's consciousness." As Jaitly goes on to say, "all other forms of economics, classical, neoclassical economics, ascribe value to something else other than the human mind." And the punchline, coming from a mathematician: "all of the equations in neoclassical economics are rubbish. The differential equations describe nothing. Economics is not about mathematics, it is about the human being."

All of these people running computer models none of them where prepared to see the obvious because it wasn't in their equations. Crap in equals crap out, no matter how you dress it up in fancy maths which only a small percentage of people can understand. It's just about bamboozling the masses so they don't query what they are being told.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"value does not exist outside of mankind's conscienceness"

I suppose that's something I've always known but never seen written down.Hopefully this idea will not get out as it would crush our economy! But I'm sure I'll sleep well tonight knowing that most people are trapped deep inside the matrix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That IRR should be illegal. Posting videos you haven't even watched. Don't you care about your reputation at all?

I liked the quotes, thought the rest of it would be interesting, clearly it was just the brief quotes highlighted and the rest waffle.

I do watch most of the videos, but just didn't have time last night.

Just thought it would save people time clicking the zerohedge link to watch the video. I got all the confirmation bias I needed from the quote "all of the equations in neoclassical economics are rubbish. The differential equations describe nothing. Economics is not about mathematics, it is about the human being."

That's not to say you can't generate formulas for economics it's just that there are far too many variables for these formulas to be relied upon 100%, human nature is an unknown quantity and at times won't obey mathematical equations. Yet in the field of economics this phoenmenmen is just ignored as it might make some prof's 5h1t equation look erm 5h1t. The fiasco which was LTCM just shows what happens when you believe your own hype. The found a equation that worked, and made a huge load of money, instead of leaving the casino they kept on gambling, most of the initial money they made was because no one else was doing it, once everyone started making the same bets the profits evaporated. But then human nature kicked in and instead of walking away they believed they could find the holy grail again. They didn't and nearly brought down the entire system. Luckily the mathematical kings learned from the lesson and stepped back and didn't think they could find a formula to turn 5h1t to AAA CDO for pension funds to buy....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just about bamboozling the masses so they don't query what they are being told.

Indeed and combined with the typical jargon used to justify all sorts of crazy policies like more debt solving problems caused by debt - whilst the real mechanism of solving the problem is thieving money from savers and pensioners etc through inflation and taxation and so on.

The link seems to be referring to general economic formulae but even in the specific case of the mortgage backed securities they didn't even cover the case they were supposed to cover i.e. what happens when the risky loans start to go wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/max-keiser-and-sandeep-jaitly-explain-why-modern-economics-rubbish

All of these people running computer models none of them where prepared to see the obvious because it wasn't in their equations. Crap in equals crap out, no matter how you dress it up in fancy maths which only a small percentage of people can understand. It's just about bamboozling the masses so they don't query what they are being told.

Several days ago the FT published an article by James Mackintosh called "Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘The Bankers’". In it he discusses the work of Prof Robert Hare, based on Hervey Cleckley's earlier study of psychopathy, which concluded with a checklist providinga means to identify psychopthas based on their behaviour. (Psychopathy is known to be caused by the underdevelopment of part of the brain, the amygdala).

In Adam Curtis's The Trap, Curtis describes a study in which subjects were asked to undertake tests; the outcome concluded that only two groups achieved the highest scores: Economists and Psychopaths.

In the same series Curtis also describes the work of mathematican John Nash. Nash was involved in creating the US global nuclear response stategy during the early days of the Cold War. In developing this strategy Nash developed the field of Game Theory, which included games such as "F0ck You, Buddy". At the time, Nash was suffering paranoid schizophrenia. His story is told in the movie "A Beautiful Mind" starring Russell Crowe.

Nash's theories pitted individuals against each other. Each game started from a position of peaceful equilibirum and ended in a fight to the death. Shortly afterwards the political elite realised that these theories could be used to maximise economic output in wider society and soon were adopted as the basis of right-wing economic theory. The work of Ayn Rand and more recently Richard Dawkins has done much to further demolish age old notions of social bonds.

In the West, in the rush of massive numbers of individuals trying to win the game, has been loss of integrity, sincerity and unity, leading to the fragmentation and polarisation of nations into the haves and the have nots, with all its consequences (disillusionment, emigration, general strikes etc).

Interestingly however the work of Professor Martin Novak of Harvard maybe about to undermine the theories that have legitimised sociopathic behaviour.

Novak's work looks at the concept of reciprocity in evolutionary biology, something Dawkins has been conspicuously quiet about. Dawkin's book The Selfish Gene has been seen as a sanction for selfishness, but Novak's much more recent work demonstrates reciprocity is far more prevalent than the likes of Dawkins, Rand and Nash would have you believe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/evolution/8382449/Martin-Nowak-a-helping-hand-for-evolution.html

Ironically, it would seem the values preached by Jesus are encoded in the laws of biology, so the Telegraph article says. But then anybody with a healthy amygdala already knew that; it would seem that only politicians, economists and psychopaths need to be told.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/41fe2882-9cbe-11e0-bf57-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1QI9rlShw

http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=martin+nowak+supercooperators&aq=0s&aqi=g-s1g-b1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=2b4aed84f9315d78&biw=1440&bih=670

Edited by nmarks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly however the work of Professor Martin Novak of Havard maybe about to undermine the theories that have legitimised sociopathic behaviour.

Novak's work looks at the concept of reciprocity in evolutionary biology,...

Harvard eh. One of the bankers colleges.

So now the bankers etc have got all the money through being sociopathic they want everybody to be nice.

Sounds reasonable.

It sounds like they're going to give the bailout money back and cut down on extravagant champagne and lobster lunches at Wimbledon - and about time too. Some hope.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harvard eh. One of the bankers colleges.

So now the bankers etc have got all the money through being sociopathic they want everybody to be nice.

Sounds reasonable.

It sounds like they're going to give the bailout money back and cut down on extravagant champagne and lobster lunches at Wimbledon - and about time too. Some hope.

Its nice to think that if people were more considerate and cooperative and a bit less aggressively narcissistic the next crash wouldn't be so severe, but like you say: some hope.

As for the politicians lecturing the population on cooperation - what a cheek! Remember : There is no such thing as society.

Edited by nmarks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't watch it at all.

I wouldn't expect you to...after all, where would you find the time?

Actually my favorite quote comes from Shakespeare..

'things are neither good nor bad lest thinking make them so'

Try putting that in fromt of bankers, economists and politicians and they'd probably blow a fuse....and yet we all live by their rules.

Er...peace man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several days ago the FT published an article by James Mackintosh called "Alfred Hitchcock’s ‘The Bankers’". In it he discusses the work of Prof Robert Hare, based on Hervey Cleckley's earlier study of psychopathy, which concluded with a checklist providinga means to identify psychopthas based on their behaviour. (Psychopathy is known to be caused by the underdevelopment of part of the brain, the amygdala).

In Adam Curtis's The Trap, Curtis describes a study in which subjects were asked to undertake tests; the outcome concluded that only two groups achieved the highest scores: Economists and Psychopaths.

In the same series Curtis also describes the work of mathematican John Nash. Nash was involved in creating the US global nuclear response stategy during the early days of the Cold War. In developing this strategy Nash developed the field of Game Theory, which included games such as "F0ck You, Buddy". At the time, Nash was suffering paranoid schizophrenia. His story is told in the movie "A Beautiful Mind" starring Russell Crowe.

Nash's theories pitted individuals against each other. Each game started from a position of peaceful equilibirum and ended in a fight to the death. Shortly afterwards the political elite realised that these theories could be used to maximise economic output in wider society and soon were adopted as the basis of right-wing economic theory. The work of Ayn Rand and more recently Richard Dawkins has done much to further demolish age old notions of social bonds.

In the West, in the rush of massive numbers of individuals trying to win the game, has been loss of integrity, sincerity and unity, leading to the fragmentation and polarisation of nations into the haves and the have nots, with all its consequences (disillusionment, emigration, general strikes etc).

Interestingly however the work of Professor Martin Novak of Harvard maybe about to undermine the theories that have legitimised sociopathic behaviour.

Novak's work looks at the concept of reciprocity in evolutionary biology, something Dawkins has been conspicuously quiet about. Dawkin's book The Selfish Gene has been seen as a sanction for selfishness, but Novak's much more recent work demonstrates reciprocity is far more prevalent than the likes of Dawkins, Rand and Nash would have you believe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/evolution/8382449/Martin-Nowak-a-helping-hand-for-evolution.html

Ironically, it would seem the values preached by Jesus are encoded in the laws of biology, so the Telegraph article says. But then anybody with a healthy amygdala already knew that; it would seem that only politicians, economists and psychopaths need to be told.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/41fe2882-9cbe-11e0-bf57-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1QI9rlShw

http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=martin+nowak+supercooperators&aq=0s&aqi=g-s1g-b1&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=2b4aed84f9315d78&biw=1440&bih=670

If we can work out the default state (either competitive or collaborative) of mankind, then we know the solutions to all the social economic problems in the world.

Perhaps both are in operation and that group selection operates at group of a few hundred people and then individual selection operates against people

of other groups. So, pure communist community has and can exist in a small group and that works pretty well. On large group, it is the competition that

takes precedence. Perhaps that was what the tribal savannah life 100,000 years ago have made us to be what we are today.

(Thought Richard Dawkins emphasis that man are the only species who can use rational mind to fight these genetic instructions)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.