[Noisebridge-discuss] economics

Joseph Brenner doomvox at gmail.com
Tue Nov 22 11:50:11 PST 2011


Ryan Rawson <ryanobjc at gmail.com> wrote:

>This is where terms like 'inelastic demand' is bandied about.

I would add that if you know some math, as many people here do, econ
terminology often seems weird.
Like, "Elasticity?  Oh, you mean the slope."

> As an analogy, microeconomics is more like physics and math, and
> macroeconomics is more like biology.

Yes, pretty close.  I usually compare it to ecology: they're both
studies of complex, interrelated systems.
And there are some historical connections (Adam Smith was influenced
by Darwin).

The funny thing is that liberals tend to be conservative on
environmental issues, whereas conservatives tend to be liberal on
them.

But then, conservatives haven't been inclined to be "conservative"
(i.e. playing it safe) on economic issues in recent decades, so go
figure.

> I feel like the thought that economics is 'too complex' to understand
> is more a function of the competing noise in the marketplace of ideas
> than any inherently difficult concepts.

There are a lot of people jamming, just now.  It's critically
important to put over the idea that it's all the fault of Big
Government and those damn Democrats.


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list