News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Depressions Work by mhartl on Wednesday February 04, 2009 @07:02PM (#466772)
I find it strange that there still exist named schools of thought in economics; perhaps it's a sign of the field's intellectual immaturity. After all, which schools of thought are there in chemistry or physics? A few centuries ago you could have answered that question, but today it doesn't even make sense. I wonder if economics will ever reach the same level of development.

For what it's worth, the only economists who consistently avoid setting off my bullshit meter are the Austrians. And yet, their views border on lunatic fringe according to mainstream economists. In a world where those same economists set policy, that is an alarming combination.

Re:How Depressions Work by bokonist on Wednesday February 04, 2009 @09:21PM (#466979)
This post does a decent job explaining the phenomenon: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/08/de-gust...

The core problem is that economics cannot use falsifiable experiments, and it is very highly politicized.

Re:How Depressions Work by mhartl on Friday February 06, 2009 @01:08AM (#469440)
The core problem is that economics cannot use falsifiable experiments

I agree that falsifiable experiments are difficult in economics, which is why we must rely instead on logic and reason---a strategy seemingly abandoned by modern economists.

I remember the ridiculous (and since discredited) argument by Card & Krueger that increases in the minimum wage increased employment, at least according to their data. And yet, when you raise prices on normal goods, the quantity demanded falls; if you force companies to pay employees more, they will hire less. If the data say otherwise, the data are either wrong or too noisy to be trustworthy. (Unfortunately, their paper wasn't merely an academic curiosity---it gave Bill Clinton and Congress political cover to raise the minimum wage in 1996.)

And now we hear economists fret that Americans, who have been under-saving and over-spending for years, may yet ruin the economy---by saving too much and spending too little. Someone needs to tell them that wagging your finger and saying "liquidity trap" doesn't magically give the emperor clothes.

Re:How Depressions Work by dominik on Tuesday February 10, 2009 @09:31AM (#475171)
Thanks for introducing me to Unqualified Reservations, it's quite an interesting blog.
Re:How Depressions Work by Zak on Wednesday February 04, 2009 @08:51PM (#466940)
Re:How Depressions Work by ajb on Thursday February 05, 2009 @06:03AM (#467558)
Yes, but they don't differ on how you deal with practical problems, at least not ones on the level of how to design a car or a computer. Maybe they would affect cutting edge semiconductor research or fusion reactor design, (I don't think the interpretations of quantum physics do, but other conjectures might).
Re:How Depressions Work by mhartl on Thursday February 05, 2009 @03:10PM (#468589)
I figured someone might mention this. (I almost addressed it in my original comment, but it was a bit peripheral to my main point.) The various quantum interpretations are not schools of physics thought; every physicist "believes" in quantum mechanics. They are schools of thought on the interpretation of quantum mechanics---which certainly is an indication of that (sub)field's intellectual immaturity. And, like economics, the interpretation of quantum mechanics has more than its share of bullshit. As Stephen Hawking supposedly once said, "When I hear of Schrödinger’s cat, I reach for my gun."

N.B. I predict the rise of quantum decoherence theory will change this picture in fairly short order.

Re:How Depressions Work by DaniFong on Thursday February 05, 2009 @03:34PM (#468644)
I consider the silence of the Copenhagen interpretation over what happens during measurement to be an actual difference of physics, not of interpretation. If some other theory were able to predict, say, the time it takes for a wave function to collapse, or the number of particles another must interact with for it to decohere, or so on, it's a difference in predictive capacity, not merely of metaphysics.
Re:How Depressions Work by mhartl on Friday February 06, 2009 @12:53AM (#469428)
That's a good point. There is definitely some physics content in the interpretation of quantum mechanics---Bell's Theorem certainly took many physicists by surprise when it came out, since it proved people were arguing over more than words---but in any case it's all a tiny higher order term in the series expansion for 'physics'. (The 0th order term is "Newton", FWIW. ;-)
Re:How Depressions Work by DaniFong on Friday February 06, 2009 @01:34AM (#469464)
Those tiny terms matter when things go nonlinear! ;-)
Re:How Depressions Work by pfedor on Thursday February 05, 2009 @11:37AM (#468155)
Interpretation of quantum mechanics is outside of the scope of physics, it's more like philosophy or something. For physics to be like economy in that respect, there would have to exist, for example, university professors who still wouldn't believe special relativity or quantum mechanics and claim that only the classical newtonian mechanics makes any sense.
Re:How Depressions Work by whatusername on Wednesday February 04, 2009 @07:17PM (#466800)
aren't there some various schools of thought around string theory?
Re:How Depressions Work by ovi256 on Thursday February 05, 2009 @05:35AM (#467528)
This concurrs with the grandfather's theory. This particular domain of physics, quantum theory, is certainly new and, we may say, as immature as the other domains were 3 centuries ago.