A thread for books about economy
Got this from the Sims 1 Recommended Reading List
>>25455949Is there no economics book that's a bit skeptical about whether the stuff works? Like it presents a common belief/theorem/model, and give example cases where it applies and when it fails to explain things. Not looking for crackpot crank shit. Just something more intellectually honest.
>>25455949Crazy that neoclassicultists deny the Cantillon effect is even real
>>25455949why does /lit/ always has some moron that asks about the economy and books about it? They keep trying to learn shit, but refuse to do the one thing that'll teach them most about the economy.GET A JOB
>>25455971>Just something more intellectually honest.lol good luck. economics is the most bullshit of subjects. only educated scammers and low level retards believe in it.
>>25455971>he doesn’t knowLiberal economics is the crackpot crank shit rofl
>>25455971Just blame it on the invisible hand.
what is it about economics that causes so many low iq normies to say stuff like >>25455971 and >>25456006?
>>25456001source for evidence of cantillon effect being significant in a modern economy when central banks that project their moves in advance? cantillon lived in the 18th century. they didn't have fed fomc meetings every month projecting monetary policy to the whole world.
>>25456098>transferring money from taxpayers to commercial banks to spend at yesterday's prices or loan out to said taxpayers with compounding interest is no big deal broTrust the science?
>>25456126the cantillon effect supposedly comes from expansion of the money supply not transfer payments. i'm not wasting my time getting dumber talking to you, good day.
>>25456091give some examples of the practical value of economics and how it's benefited society
>>25456138avoiding deadweight loss from braindead political policies?
>>25456136>The government issuing bonds on money that the country doesn't have and giving banks first dibs on freshly created money from the fed for those bonds that they can then spend before inflation circulates isn't a transfer of wealth from citizens to bankersNeoclassicult education
hmm
>>25456004>implying wagies are the most knowledgeable on the economyanon...
>>25456138Read the book >>25455949 , if your only understanding of the word 'entrepreneur' is youtube you are underinformed
>>25455949To what extent is a national economy similar to an individual or family household budget?
>>25455949This genre sucks. You either get academic garbage or self-help. Business memoirs and related technical skills, like accounting, are more than almost any business/economics book.
>>25456221>Business memoirs and related technical skills, like accounting, are more than almost any business/economics book.Get on my level
>>25456042The dark matter of economics.
>>25456189It's describing a bank run.
>>25455949Undefeated.
>>25455949economy is fake, some jews with money printer can just create infinite amount of cash. keep caring about your fake economy lamo
>>25456481>Rothbard
>>25455949>Clara E. Mattei: The capitalist orderdespite fear mongering about le fascism it is a pretty good general book explaining how business cycles and the falling rate of profit (tfrp) has resulted in the majority of large political swings in the developed world like fascism, keynesianism/new deal and neoliberalism all as attempts to stop a profitability crisis>Malthus: Principles of political economywhile his writings on population are wrong (most countries rn would kill for over population), his general economic writings are the best of the 1800s notably the stimulation of demandgreat video on this stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PM3EHwV220
>>25456221The academic garbage is the best
>>25455949What do people think of this?
>>25456651It upsets me. Reading a book about capitalism in 1300-1800 Holland and the authors are using GDP per capita to make a point. How did they calculate GDP? Even today GDP is a made up number. There's always enough going on that any interpretation is plausible. Narrative fallacy.
>>25456431It's more than just a bank run, its a flight from valueless paper in to actual money. A bank run assumes people leaving with pockets of cash are carrying something valuable, but this is the issue on a much larger scale because of the endless money printing of recent decades. You can see the line explode when we lost any semblance of backing to our currency
>>25456690GDP today is a made up number because it includes jewish financial games. I would imagine it is easier to calculate GDP when cargos are real and tangible
>>25456139>>25456194see how these fucking frauds can't give one single, provable example of how economics benefits anyone but academics and grifters?
>>25456091you're a fraud. you're literally a "normie" that believes in economic theories because you were told to by someone smarter than you.
>>25457242Lmao,retard, you can read their fucking arguments in the book and decide for yourself whether you should believe or not.
>>25457285economics shouldn't be a matter of belief dumbass. an economic concept is either provable or not. if not it's just another form of time wasting slop.
>>25457285>>25457777This isn't the problem. The problem is that economics is not a rigorous science, like physics or chemistry, but economists ape the methods of physics. The humanities can't give you guarantees but they can help you order your thinking and cultivate a sense of epistemological humility. With economics, there's no thinking or humility because "science is truth". This justifies " pro-market" intervention in foreign countries at the expense of the citizens. This is how you retarded self congratulatory narratives like the Miracle of Chile. The primary purpose of economics is to rationalize decisions that have already been made.
>>25457804>this entire field of academics is a conspiracy!take some meds dude
>>25457808obviously. economics describes human behaviour, which changes based on its environment and includes itself in its environment. so doing A doesn't always lead to B, unlike in super simple sciences like physics or in even more midwit disciplines like maths
>>25457819just curious how many econ classes have u taken?
>>25457837zero. that's why I have no debt. I beat the system.
Fiat money was a mistake
>>25457808Economics is not a predictive science; it's a social science. This is why economists are not rich. Business praxis is unrelated. Finance is a different field.
>>25456091It isn't called the dismal science for no reason
>>25457808You study economics in China or the USSR and you're taught Marxism is the science. You take economic class in the US and you're taught liberalism is the science
>>25457239>hey sheep farmer, do you know how you have to take your wool all the way to market, then bother selling it, then walk all the way back?>What if I bought it off you instead for less than what you get, but you save all that time and effort?>Great, thank you!>goes to the next farmSuddenly you have someone who can make a living doing nothing but transporting/selling wool for the farmers who now have more free time to do other things that benefit them.Read a fucking book.
>>25458233Damn, how much economics do you think he had to learn before he could use arbitrage?
>>25455949The Financial Crisis Reconsidered by Daniel AronoffFragile by Design by Calomiris and HaberTheory of Social Economy by Gustav CasselThe Means of Payment by Stephen ColwellEconomic Policy for the Thinking Man by Bresciani-Turroni
>>25455971Beyond Mechanical Markets by Frydman and Goldberg
>>25455949
>>25458527>everyone always knew things people know nowneat
>>25458755>birds couldn't fly until newton figured out physics
>>25458917Do birds know about arbitrage?
>>25456155I think Neoclassicultists do recognize asymmetries of time and information as actual factors. They just see the effect as a hyperspecific case of those, so one cannot build on from it. And also seem to kinda dance around those asymmetries as practical imperfections that can be disregarded in their models.
>>25456481Came here to post this. Written in plain languages and builds its case step by step. Stood the test of time as an untarnished edifice.If you want lighter and more introductory reading there's the essay I, pencil by Leonard read or the relatively short Economics in one lesson by Henry Hazlitt.
>>25457804>This isn't the problem. The problem is that economics is not a rigorous science, like physics or chemistry, but economists ape the methods of physics. You are completely right on this point and both neo- classicals and keynesians have this fundamental flaw in the underpinning of their theory. You are, however, wrong in thinking that those are the schools of economic thought. It's why the austrian economists like >>25456481 analyze economics from a different angle that relies on logical deduction from simple, yet, irrefutable axioms. The same way logic or mathematics works out its theorems. If you want an analogy for this: You don't go prove the Pythagorean theorem by finding right angle triangle and measuring them, you prove it by working out the logic of geometry. And if you then wish to say "it's all theoretical and therefore has no basis in reality" that may be a fair argument but then you'd have to apply that principle to mathematics and logic as well.
>>25459514I finally understand the difference between Austrian and neoclassical.
>>25458970Yes, why do you think they fly south for winter? Rates are best on the off season.
>>25460788>all of the birds going there>off season
>>25456481Based and Rothpilled
>>25458566>2.87 on GoodreadsKek why? I don't typically care about that site's ratings but that is unusually low for a non-fiction book, especially one concerned with economical matters
>>25456690I'm more or less into economic history than anything else
>>25456210Not at all similar. If you want to use a model, think of it more like a business. And like a business borrowing money makes sense if it increases revenue and ability to repay that debt. But even that is oversimplifying because businesses don't print their own money and governments have goals beyond profit generation
>>25461610not enough pictures to keep the students assigned it entertained i would guess
>>25461633Good sources for this?(Real economic history, not bourgeois pseudoscience)
>>25461852A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind, or the book in the OP
>>25455949I'll ask a very crude question that's very typical of people who aren't well read in economic literature but is nevertheless relevant: What can I read to know how much I, as an individual and as a member of a globalist political structure, is getting fucked on an economic level? Like yeah no shit it's ''the jews and usury'', but I'd like to know how this works and how it fucks with all of my potential financial situations
>>25461923Decades ago everyone had silver in their pocket change. A century ago every single dollar had tangible backing.
