A personal disclaimer: I don't like McCain. ;)
I don't like his views on Foreign Policy. I don't like his views on society with respect to government. Of course, the latter applies more broadly to all candidates so he's 0 for 2.
Anyway, interesting video. Mostly accurate in my opinion. Though I do have a quibble with the worn out and tired talking point about McCain's lack of understanding about economics. What's the implication here? That they know better? Or that Obama or Hillary do simply because they never admitted that they don't know much either. This is, of course, a very different argument from which candidate is objectively better on economic policy (especially since that idea can mean different things to different people). I simply do not know. I don't even know if it is really possible to give a clear answer....especially since I'm far from an expert on the matter myself.
That said, I do believe some of his views and policy ideas on economic policy are better than Obama's or Hillary's but I don't really care. Good luck to any of the three on making significant inroads on their ideas....actually, I take that back. I don't wish them luck. :)
McCain is stupid...err...."misguided" on foreign policy...not to mention totally dishonest and delusional as the video shows. Government holds no magic wand for world affairs....something people like MCain don't want to believe. Moreover, all of our problems can be traced to compounded previous attempts at using this imaginary wand.
And if I may detach from my polite and restrained language for a moment, I'd like to state the following on McCain and others victims of delusions of grandeur:
Y'ain't got nothin'...never did, never will and stop pretending ya do. It's beyond you. Knock it off, already. You SUCK. Drop that stick you mistake for a magic wand and back away. You and others like you the world over have done plenty already. No thanks. Leave me alone. If you want to worship the false idol of your own ability, do it where you can't bother me.
Anyway, the video and much more emanate from an apparently anti-McCain website called The Real McCain .
__________________________
I wouldn't go so far
I don't know that his understanding is so lacking as is the fact the he knows he needs to say certain things for political expediency. He learned from 2000 that running an insurgent campaign and saying what needed to be said is no way to win an election. He's practically the standard bearer for the GOP these days.
And, of course, I don't think economics is developed enough a discipline to say too much about one's knowledge of it. People well versed in economics know the theories and postulates, but still can't predict their way out of a wet paper bag.
All economic theories are incomplete. Keynesians scratched their head in disbelief during stagflation because, by their theory, it shouldn't happen -- just like Marxists keep wondering why the proletariat doesn't rise up and overthrow their bourgeois masters.
__________________________I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
Comments
-economics is not about predictions and never was. It's about understanding human behavior with respect to scarcity. That's it. Period.
When people complain about the lack of accuracy in economic predictions, they're criticizing something else...not economics.
It's like criticizing astronomy or astrophysics when you're astrology reading doesn't come true.
As for Keynes, well, many argued for decades that Keynes...or better yet: those who used Keynes' ideas...had their methodology all wrong or overused, overly relied upon to understand things it couldn't possibly discern and that they were obscuring core fundamental truths with their fancy theories and hazy macro aggregates and relationships. No news there. It simply vindicated a lot of libertarian thinkers. Micro is where we find more truth.
And Marx? Well...lol.
What's the use?
Then it's not all that useful. I'd argue that, by your definition, economics is a bastardized subset of psychology.
The libertarian (well, lets call it Austrian) model seems to say "we can't ever understand how to control this (economy) with any sort of accuracy, so let's not even try". Granted, economic policy is a very blunt tool, but there isn't anything wrong with carpet bombing a few acres to kill a blade of grass. Especially, when we don't want that blade of grass to exist.
I leave it as an exercise to the reader to get the gist of the analogy. My friend Brutus14 will certainly understand since he talks nearly exclusively in analogies.
__________________________I never broke the law; I am the law! --
George W. BushJudge DreddI'm listening to...
On the contrary. my dear stinerman
It's quite useful. It does help understand or clarify very broad and relatively basic relationships that have helped propel us from the dark ages of pestilence and feudalism. You take for granted how much of it you use and understand in your personal life. It's the simple concept that instantly leads you to decide it's not worth it to drive 10 miles further to save a nickel per gallon on gas or decide it is worth it if you're going that way for something else. It also explains why you know that a gas station that dropped it's price to $2 per gallon tomorrow would not only run out of gas in a few hours but also lose a lot of money. This is just a simple example into a larger world of economics that we do in fact understand.
We also know a lot more that may not seem so obvious to most people.
The muddled messes and arguments are on far more complex matters where weeding out different factors can lead to different perceptions. It's also more muddled wen we apply very complex yet crude models and methodology to real life to seek more answers than perhaps we can readily know for sure.
But predictions as you mean them? That's another matter.
BTW, Austrian School is a little more complex than that....as I'm sure you know...but just the same, libertarianism is not grounded in Austrian School Concepts. Nonetheless, you're over simplified assessment does have some merit in a very generic way. The difference between different schools of thought is sometimes where to draw the line for the art of the possible.
It's the simple concept that
Those are examples where economics and simple accounting intersect and can be predicted with some accuracy. Microeconomics just tries to steal the glory from accounting, marketing...
The Economic theories that I was aware of with related formulas tended to act as if multicollinearity
doesn't exist, among other things . Most non-"common sense" theories/formulas seem to be greatly oversimplified or try to explain so much that they explain nothing at all.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
That may be so
in some sense.
I really don't know. Though I think Micro is a little more than that.
The complex and contentious stuff is just that. I actually don't much thought or weight on it.
But in either event, my only goal was to answer to what econ is not. And it is simply not what a lot of people like to think it is nor does it pretend to be.
huh?
*Every* field of knowledge is about being able to make predictions, John. That's the entire point. It makes no sense to say economics is about understanding how people deal with scarce resources and also say it isn't about making predictions.
Put it this way- if I give you a situation involving scarce resources you use economics to predict what will happen.
How exactly do you test economic theories if not by matching their predictions to reality?
__________________________I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I think he meant predictions in a slightly different way...
Sure, we can make simplified and generic predictions and they do have uses. The concept of predictions that I was speaking to is cases where economist X says this and economist Y says that...and on a very complex matter with a lot of variables.
Astrophysicists can make solid and accurate predictions on some things. We'll call this well founded basic astrophysics. But they can disagree and be uncertain and only make educated guesses about much more far flung and cutting edge concepts. We'll call highly advanced and still slightly speculative astrophysics.
Much of what people use to disparage economics is in akin to the overly-sought-after and protean latter category because we take the former for granted.
"McCain is
Neo-cons and their sheep want the US government out of their lives and into the lives of foreigners....
I'm sure the Patriots would have been much pleased if the Revolution failed and then 10 years later Lafayette comes back, "frees" the Americans and installs a Constitutional Monarchy modeled after the French.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
None of this matters
because it is not nearly as important as whether Obama wears a flag pin on his lapel.
Or gay marriage.
__________________________qui tacet consentire
Flag lapel pins....... that's why I vote.
*cough* *choke* *gag*
__________________________It is the economy, stupid.