Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by dools on Monday June 10, 2024 @01:15AM
(#40630398)
> The irony is that he is correct about the physics.
He definitely isn’t
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by s1artibartfast on Monday June 10, 2024 @01:17AM
(#40630411)
He absolutely is, which just makes it all more funny.
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by dools on Monday June 10, 2024 @03:31AM
(#40631116)
Yep okay I retract my "confidently wrong about physics" statement, someone else explained it and I get it:
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by shxuw on Monday June 10, 2024 @05:18AM
(#40631643)
Ah, perhaps you might reconsider your epistemic status on the economics of Milton Friedman.
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by dools on Monday June 10, 2024 @07:10AM
(#40632271)
Nope :)
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by quern on Monday June 10, 2024 @02:46AM
(#40630888)
I agree he's correct about the physics but I disagree with his father's economics -- my thinking on economics is more in line with David's.
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by dools on Monday June 10, 2024 @03:30AM
(#40631110)
Yes I retract my "wrong about physics" assertion, I have had it explained to me and I get it:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40631089
Although I still think Chicago school/libertarian economics is "confidently wrong".
Re:On being brought up by libertarian economists
by quern on Monday June 10, 2024 @03:51AM
(#40631210)
Evidently, but presenting that assertion without backing it up with any kind of argument isn't very constructive.
Of course I don't expect anyone to refute an entire school of thought in an HN post.
Some people in this thread think that you can take two cars and double the kinetic energy acting on both of them. If this were true, you could create infinite energy by repeatedly colliding cars.
Perhaps it isn't surprising that people who think this is true also disagree with his economics.