If economics is a science, why can't economists agree on the laws of economics?

And the context embarrasses those who pull up this quote every day. Pic related.

Always think, what /biz denies to believe.
And do, what /biz would never do.
This credo fully paid my student loans and the appartment I sit in right now.

Attached: krugman.png (641x234, 30K)

No one disputes that supply and demand determine prices. There are lots of things economists agree on.

>Austrian shit eating faggot

I suggest you see how did F. von Mises manage the Great Depression in Austria while being an adviser to their dictator.

Stupid useful idiots...

Attached: yq46xcwue6j01.png (2518x1024, 382K)

making the internet capitalist will destroy the corrupt institutions that promote scientism

Keynesians deserve the rope

>damage control embarrasses anyone but the damage controller
Only one red face here: yours

can't wait to see those keynesians volunteering their own money to be debased against cpi after the fed is burned to the ground

You are right. 90% of faggots here think they’re geniuses that will be ChainLink Millionaires at the end of 2018.

Keynesians might deserve it, but only austrian school followers willingly put the noose around their neck and jumped from the chair.
And did so for decades over decades, because "collapse is just around the corner".

Attached: pepefun.jpg (610x610, 52K)

Just stick to the Trillion Dollar Coin nonsense instead. Gotcha.

People like you are the reason I am able to be financially independent with no debt and this comfy appartment.

Please take care of your bags. I might sodld them early December 17, but I have kind memories of the moons I participated in.

Attached: 1321353543257898.jpg (600x590, 76K)

The Austrian position that Central Banks are artificially distorting markets through QE and adjusting interest rates means this how?

Austrian investing exists in many forms such as far OTM puts, staying in cash when CAPE/Tobin's Q is high and buying when low.
Riding the Tiger of a stock market that relies on the CB for liquidity.

Knowing that the situation is fucked doesn't mean abstaining from making money in it and doing dumb shit like stacking gold coins for the collapse.
If you made it what are you still doing larping round here.

Attached: 1461802741762.jpg (500x322, 16K)

>doing dumb shit like stacking gold coins for the collapse
So... why do each and every libertard do this then?

>If you made it what are you still doing larping round here.
Because I like making fun of the libertards. It is like alt-right but for economics. Maybe that is why /pol is so interested in it.

Anyways, have fun - I have an appointment with my local gym for the next hour.

Attached: 343243243234.jpg (253x229, 19K)

name a legit economist who doesn't agree with the idea of supply and demand

>Maybe that is why /pol is so interested in it.
I don't know what planet you live on but Jow Forums is not interested in Austrian economics

>goes to keynes gym where they reduce the weight of the kilogram each year to make you believe you're getting stronger

>goes to keynes gym where they reduce the weight of the kilogram each year to make you believe you're getting stronger
wew that's a great analogy man, is that yours or ripped of somewhere else?

Attached: jahhas nilen kintosta.png (729x638, 154K)

Lmao

Right? We're gonna be Linkie Billionaires

I dont give a shit about mises or keynes

oh hey it was just a joke, to provoke thought! i didn't actually believed what i wrote, like, there was a guy who predicted st. petersburg would have more skycrapers than NYC! HAH!

BUT! the primary point is that i'm no specialist of techngology anyways! even IF i was being dumb (which i wasn't, i was kidding!) it would have nothing to do with my prediction about bitcoin, because my prediction about bitcoin has nothing to do with technology!!

Attached: 2019-01-19 13_28_25-Paul Krugman Responds To All The People Throwing Around His Old Internet Quote - (711x674, 79K)

Mr. Grugman should shut the fuck up about anything tech related lol!

Attached: 3b6.jpg (353x400, 20K)

Based Eugen Böhm von Bawerk user

Guess physics isnt a science either since we have newtonian mechanics, relativity, quantum, string, brane branches

>like, there was a guy who predicted st. petersburg would have more skycrapers than NYC! HAH!

by 2098*

Econ somehow transformed itself from a social science to a so-called hard science.
Part of the inclination toward calling it a hard-science comes from the almost religious fervor of western academic economists in regards to their models.
It can't be a dogma, so they made it a science.

Karl Marx

Ive never seen someone be as consistently wrong as Krugman and still rake in millions as an "expert" on the field.

>sodld

kys cringe faggot

If science is a science, why can't scientists agree on the laws of economics?

Laws are not absolutes nor are they self evident. Laws and theories currently considered sound are those which best fit the available evidence.

(and before some idiot that doesn't understand the difference between laws and theories chimes in - laws describe how something operates, theories describe the mechanism by which that something operates)

So you made a couple bucks and bought a shit tier apartment. Nice job kiddo. Sit back and waste your life away while us men build even moreso on top of the wealth we accumulated in 2017. Pathetic frog poster.

>most people have nothing to say to each others
Yes goy, top down information IS the only way, horizontal communication is antisemitic;

Those branches of physics don't directly disagree with one another though.

This guy and Tone Vay regularly engage in coitus with one another.

He's absolutely right though

It's a developing science, and quite honestly an incomplete science. One of the goals of a discipline of science is to predict and control phenomena within it's purview, and economics has no ability to predict certain basic phenomena, like a change in consumer preferences. Instead it makes lazy assumptions based largely on the cultural lens of the person making predictions about what consumers want.

I got to senior level economics in college before I found out that it was an incomplete science and I still feel fucking cheated.

>stupid posts get BTFOd by other anons
>”heh, wow you guys sure are dumb, I’ll have you know that I sold the exact top of crypto! Yeah that’s right! You better believe it! Heh!”
You’re such a fucking faggot and clueless liar. Kill yourself, kike

>It's a developing science
Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations in 1776. Isaac Newton didn't publish a complete version of Principia until 1726. Economics is nearly the same age as physics.

Yes, but it's still a developing science.

It's that late bloomer whose early growth was stunted by malnutrition and shit. It's hard to develop as a science when your answers might directly compete with the interests of the powerful. It has a way of fucking with your objectivity.

Get out Sheldon.

But he does, his theory explains value when supply and demand are at an equilibrium, so that the reader can best understand it. But it's only for the sake of elucidation, once you get this down you can start adding factors like supply and demand to his value theory

He seems to fail to understand time preference though. Which is why he thinks wage labour is inherently exploitative.

What do you mean by time preference?

Pardon the incoming clumsy train of thought.

Marx's shtick was that capitalists extract value from the workers in the form of profit.

Hypothetically say a car takes 5 years to build.
Capitalist invests his capital, say $10K at the beginning.
5 Years later he gets the 10K back when the car is sold. All profit goes to the workers.

Does that sound fair? The capitalist has to give up capital for five years with no return.

To reward the capitalist for his low time preference he should get a profit in the future for providing the liquidity now.
Alternatively, the workers have a lower time preference as they want a wage now.

It's about discounting today's dollar versus future dollars.

All the while the capitalist is paying wages through these 5 years. Which is part of the 10K I guess.

youtu.be/uOzotWrHheU

Here's a more eloquent description.

Yes, but the capitalists disproportionately reward the today's dollar compared the future dollars. So, when you eventually raise the wages, it'll be devalued due to your very strategy's rent-seeking for the valuation. This very deal screws over the workers unless you reward them adequately in today's dollars.

Economics is a meme and a pseudo science and I study that shit

>Yes, but the capitalists disproportionately reward the today's dollar compared the future dollars.
I think you've got that round the wrong way round but I see you point.

Today's liquidity doesn't come from savers. It comes from Central banks.
Capitalists today can get near free money from Central Banks to fund projects, they have no time preference/skin in the game anymore.

its not about time preference. marx reduces capital ownership to the ability to extract rent. This is basically what being a wage worker is, is a rentier of the the capitalist's assets in order to produce.

physics didnt begin with Principia lmao. You had astronomers like galileo performing experiments 200 years before

It's still about time preference.
Someone had to abstain from consuming in the now to raise that capital for the future.

Try making bread from scratch, you need ore to make the tools, then till the fields, then plant, wait for wheat to grow and so on and so on. How long do you think that would take?

Instead, the capitalist who has abstained from consuming in the past can provide this liquidity for wages immediately instead of the workers waiting 5+ years for some bread. This is due to the capitalists time preference.

This so-called rent seeking comes from the cumulative effort of saving over years to provide these assets.

Watch the video I posted further up if you're interested.

no, its not about time preference. the wage worker has no meaningful capital at any time, or he would not be a wage worker

This. Empirical evidence is Jewish voodoo.

Yes. So, just give it to everyone instead of gatekeeping it holy shit.

the fact economics spawned the fucking evil that is business grades is enough to consider it the most sophist type of philosophy

Oh wait you're both just being retarded never mind. I though I found an honest commie for once.

The wage worker can build capital by abstaining from consuming in the immediate, this is how capital was first accumulated.
I'm not defending today's affairs so stop your REEing
I'm disagreeing with Marx that all wage labour is inherently exploitative. It can be, but it doesn't have to be.

no, you are confused with nomenclature.
according to marx, capital ownership is the ability to extract rent, if you are not a rent collector eg. landlord, you are not a capitalist in the economy.

It's like the computer science meme with that guy who writes computer science on a chalk board then makes an X through the computer part and the science part.

You're confused that's why you're a commie.
This capital ownership was derived from what I explained up to now, it didn't just suddenly appear.

I agree with your analysis. And no, I will not stop REEEing because it's directly affecting our situation.

The only solution is to pay the managers, admin, capitalists, and so on less than the workers. A business is a pyramid scheme. The bottom rung are the workers. The top is the capitalist. The problem is that the bottom rung always get paid the least for MOST of the work. The only way to fix this situation is to have workers stop enabling the disgusting rent seeking behavior.

you havent wrapped around your mind marx's ideas on capital being relevant in the economy.
capital in your bank account/under your bed/etc isnt relevant because you arent using it to do anything. marx is specifically talking about productive capital - land, factories, vehicles, etc. things that you own that require labour inputs in order to create something.

No I explained why the capitalist should make a profit. It's like you're not listening.

You're bending over so far backwards to misunderstand me.
You can use money to buy productive capital.

>You can use money to buy productive capital
until you have, it isnt.
Marx always refers to the creation of commodities in his essays. Thats what early industrialisation was all about - producing physical goods. The idea of idle financial capital is just irrelevant to his time.

I don't think that capitalist shouldn't make any profit. In fact, I never said that. They just make way too fucking much.

100k a year for fucking what? Filling out 10-20 forms a year? Congrats? Tell me why shouldn't the capitalist earn 5k a year and pay 2 workers 42.5k instead? The capitalist will earn more than enough from the business' shares anyways.

that's because orthodox economics is just classcuckery and they've pretty much banned the only truly scientific ecomics analytical framework.
Based Dick Wolf explains why you've been cucked so hard
youtube.com/watch?v=3wkO3qsZY_U

productive capital is rolled up under Marx's version of LTV. his critique of the bourgeoisie is aimed specifically at landlords and people who collect interest, EG people who generate value without inputting labor.

You're still doing it. Also idle financial capital were relevant to his time in the form of bonds.

I don't disagree, yet this whole discussion was about time preference and wage labour not being inherently exploitative.

you are just a dumbfuck. good day

It is exploitative right now because of the traditional and regulated business structure. The only way to stop this exploitation is to stop working for any business that pay you less than your bosses.

>economics is NOT a science
FTFY
It's also not a math.

How did this guy earn a nobel prize?

>Spends half the thread misunderstand and misconstruing
And I'm the dumb fuck? Fuck off retard

Still agree. Anything deviating from the homesteading, saving and contracting principle should be shunned.
An elevation of class consciousness, but NOT based on the faulty assumption that all wage labour is exploitative.

If you're still interested there's a good talk by Hoppe on this. How Austrian's and Marxists agree but the starting position are different.
youtu.be/WhT_kA8EtYE

They don't have Nobel prizes for economics. Just like they don't have one for mathematics.

>you: its about time preference
>me: nope, its not about time preference
>you: why are you misunderstanding me???
lmao, you dumbfuck

Your video is an example that economics is a bastard of philosophy, look they are talking about love as a angular stone of commerce, but they never realize the true concept of love which is irrenunciably against benefit, commerce and comfort, because it's selfless and by the nature of love you never are giving the same that you get, it's unjust by human rules and only something trascendent can redempt love as just (in marxist terms it's the state vision of marxism can redempt the individual by making the end goal of marxism something much bigger, in capitalism it's the "meritocracy" which can justify any individual story of suffering, in christianity it's god because it's all knowing)

maybe that's why marxists are so against christianity, because christianity has a far more deeper way to look at love than marxism will ever have

This literally never happened.
You just don't understand time preference.
Anyone else can read this thread and see that

>it never happened, just read the thread

Attached: niggaudumb.png (252x142, 22K)

Just because you stated it doesn't make it so, you retard. I explained why unlike you.

Chainlink reminds of when /x/ tried to predict the end of the world in 2016. Goddamn I do wish I was that fat Russian that made a fortune scamming all those retards though.

If physics is a science why can't scientists agree on what the fuck quantum mechanics is?

Austrians are considered the flat earthers of economics. Like the few antivaxers scientists

You've been brainwashed kiddo. Austrian economics is the real redpill. The reason they are ostracized is so you can keep taking the blue pill.

WAKE UP!

Attached: 1546461946492.jpg (960x678, 157K)

The price of the crypto currency chainlink (LINK) tokens will be $1,000 USD each by the end of the calendar year 2018 A.D.

>empirical evidence (reality) doesn't exist
t. austrian school

Attached: hoppe logic is racist.png (840x826, 233K)

heavy larp

The past is not the same as the present, or future.

>The models work... until they don't
t. every other economist

>us men build even moreso on top of the wealth we accumulated in 2017
>accumulated

Lel

Economics is just a mass application of psychology in an economic arena. There is no consensus because everyone doesn’t know the exact psychology of everyone else.

how clever user. Are you also going to pretend to know what capitalism or communism is.
Nothing is ever certain. Not even every physical thing that ever existed (at the quantum level)

Psychology is simply applied philosophy. Just because you believe your opinion about an issue to be true, doesn't mean it will be true for every other similar issue. Just because I say a coin will land head and it does in fact land head, it does not make me an Nobel prize winning economist

Dumbass

tldr; You're a sheep and follow others, instead of formulating your own thoughts