[13:10:52] <@MacRohard> http://www.mises.org/story/2772 [13:33:00] <@MacRohard> http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2007/11/113_14581.html [14:24:46] <_Axis_> MacRohard: a guy at the pub a few weeks ago was spouting about the FHL [14:24:53] <_Axis_> i paid it no mind [14:24:58] <_Axis_> i was gettin my drink on [14:25:51] <_Axis_> but god bless you for reading mises [14:30:57] <@MacRohard> is mises famous or something [14:30:57] <@MacRohard> ? [14:34:11] <_Axis_> ludwig von mises? [14:34:15] <_Axis_> umm, yeah [14:34:33] <_Axis_> in academic economic circles [14:34:39] <_Axis_> he's like fuckin plato [14:34:42] <@MacRohard> ahh [14:34:51] <@MacRohard> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises [14:34:53] <_Axis_> yes [14:35:21] <@MacRohard> i'll try and remember that in case some hot economist chick ever talks to me [14:35:27] * _Axis_ agrees with austrian economics [14:35:39] <_Axis_> no really [14:35:41] <@MacRohard> what if there's austrian economists who don't agree [14:35:56] <_Axis_> he laid some great foundation for guys like friedman [14:36:22] <@MacRohard> economics is such a load of bullshit [14:36:26] <_Axis_> hahaha [14:37:05] <_Axis_> you can say the same of philosophy [14:37:16] <_Axis_> economics is the philosophy of money [14:37:18] <@MacRohard> oh i do [14:37:29] <_Axis_> and is also founded on logic, the same as philosophy [14:37:39] <@MacRohard> philosophy is also a load of bullshit [14:37:54] <_Axis_> but that doesn't mean it's useless [14:38:02] <@MacRohard> but at least philosophy has an element of drama [14:38:12] <@MacRohard> it's sortof like entertainment [14:38:29] <_Axis_> i see it from the other side [14:38:37] <_Axis_> i see the drama as additional bullshit [14:38:40] <_Axis_> hahaha [14:39:23] <_Axis_> but once you disagree with a certain school on foundational matters, you're no longer in that school [14:39:35] <_Axis_> another philosophy suits you better [14:40:23] <@MacRohard> i was merely questioning what gave certain austrian economists the right to claim the name austrian economics [14:40:43] <_Axis_> oh, ludwig is *the* austrian economist [14:41:00] <@MacRohard> he's an austrian economist.. i'm sure there have been many others [14:41:07] <_Axis_> if you agree with his analysis, you are of the austrian school [14:41:22] <_Axis_> the chicago school is an offshoot [14:41:36] <_Axis_> all these schools fir together like a tree you see [14:41:40] <_Axis_> with branches [14:41:58] <_Axis_> everyone is somewhere on the tree [14:42:04] <_Axis_> *everyone* [14:42:58] <@MacRohard> since there isn't a well defined tree and no single person authorized to categorize people into branches i suspect that's a fairly meaningless thing to say [14:44:27] <_Axis_> the first "branch" is with william godwin and adam smith [14:44:54] <_Axis_> adamn smith used a constrained model [14:45:06] <_Axis_> william godwin used an unconstrained model [14:45:29] <_Axis_> and from there on, it gets more and more detailed [14:45:57] <@MacRohard> the thing that bothers me the most about things like economics is that people spend all the time learning about the history of what other people did [14:46:19] <@MacRohard> neither adam smith or william godwin were the first ones to think in those terms [14:46:51] <@MacRohard> they just bundled some well hashed ideas together in slightly different ways [14:46:55] <_Axis_> thats true [14:47:14] <_Axis_> every philosophy has existed [14:47:25] <_Axis_> there are just those that document them academicly [14:47:34] <_Axis_> you're exactly right [14:48:41] <_Axis_> no one knows who "invented" addition, subtraction, etc [14:48:57] <_Axis_> but it certainly wasn't the first time any one of those operations took place [14:49:03] <@MacRohard> it's almost indistinguishable from writing book reviews of your favorite fiction author [14:49:30] <@MacRohard> the point is when you study math you don't care who invented addition or subtraction [14:49:35] <@MacRohard> it's not relevant [14:49:38] <_Axis_> in practical terms, you're reviewing a book you enjoyed [14:49:44] <_Axis_> the enjoyment was useful [14:49:49] <@MacRohard> the thing with economics and philosophy is that the history of it is all there is [14:49:54] <@MacRohard> so that's what people tend to study [14:50:24] <_Axis_> and with economics, its an analysis that you found useful [14:50:33] <_Axis_> it does have real world utility [14:50:42] <@MacRohard> i'm not so sure about that :) [14:51:16] <@MacRohard> you can view real world events through pretty much any economic model and make predictions that are right all of the time by using the right variables [14:51:33] <@MacRohard> things get different names is all [14:52:17] <_Axis_> if that were so, the economists would all bank the market and walk off with the whole world in thier pockets [14:52:31] <@MacRohard> no, that's exactly why they can't do that [14:52:36] <@MacRohard> their models are useless [14:53:01] <@MacRohard> 'by using the right variables' is impossible becuase you never know what they are [14:53:48] <_Axis_> ok, this is the problem that is occuring here: [14:54:00] <_Axis_> a description of reality is *not* reality [14:54:18] <_Axis_> it is a subset *of* reality [14:54:47] <_Axis_> i'm sure there is some fancy term for this [14:54:58] <_Axis_> but anyhoo [14:55:07] <@MacRohard> it's a complicated world.. there will always be stuff you didn't take into account... often those are the most important things. [14:55:08] <_Axis_> it's like a map [14:55:20] <_Axis_> there are different maps for different purposes [14:55:25] <_Axis_> they are useful tools [14:55:31] <@MacRohard> yea.. it's all just a bunch of fudge factors [14:55:37] <_Axis_> but they don't allow you to "hack space-time" [14:55:44] <@MacRohard> oops. we got the wrong answer.. we'll apply this fudge and that makes it right for this historical data. [14:55:48] <@MacRohard> oops. we got it wrong again [14:56:14] <_Axis_> and i think you're confusing financial analysis with economic analysis [14:56:44] <@MacRohard> i'm not specifically talking about money [14:57:06] <_Axis_> economics is the study of utilizing resources [14:57:28] <_Axis_> it's not totally about money [14:57:37] <_Axis_> whereas financial analysis is [14:59:55] <_Axis_> economists have been proven wrong on an individual basis [15:00:02] <_Axis_> but economics itself hasn't [15:00:19] <@MacRohard> that's because it's so vague and self contradicting [15:00:47] <_Axis_> please, define it better [15:01:15] <_Axis_> "best practices" always evolve [15:01:25] <_Axis_> in economics, or any other pursuit [15:02:06] <_Axis_> :D [15:05:02] <_Axis_> the TOE will settle it all [15:05:21] <@MacRohard> resources will always be monopolized by those in power.. and used for whatever those in power want to use them for. [15:05:56] <_Axis_> thats at issue to [15:06:14] <_Axis_> without defining "power" how can you even submit that as a hypotesis [15:06:25] <_Axis_> economics. [15:06:39] <@MacRohard> power == the power to monopolize the resources :) [15:06:56] <_Axis_> is it might, ability, popularity? [15:07:02] <@MacRohard> it can be anything [15:07:06] <_Axis_> right [15:07:17] <_Axis_> economics maps this shit out [15:07:25] <_Axis_> wtf is wrong with that? [15:08:03] <_Axis_> you have to have a framework with which to rationalize and discuss these things [15:08:25] <@MacRohard> i guess the problem is that big things can happen that wipe out all your predictions [15:08:49] <_Axis_> maps don't make predictions [15:08:52] <@MacRohard> often things are happening for what looks like one reason but is actually another [15:09:23] <@MacRohard> basically it's all too complicated to map without much better source data which will never be available [15:09:39] <_Axis_> economics can tell you where you are, and suggest directions to get from one place to another [15:10:00] <_Axis_> it cannot "take you there" nor predict what will be encountered along the way [15:10:20] <_Axis_> it's a map [15:10:27] <_Axis_> thats the best analogy i can think of [15:10:28] <@MacRohard> or ensure you will ever get there [15:10:32] <_Axis_> right [15:10:38] <@MacRohard> so basically it does nothing :) [15:10:43] <_Axis_> it's a tool [15:10:52] <_Axis_> and you're being a doorknob