[davep]

It's hard to tell, but either way, mainstream economists are ignoring the dangers of climate change and resource depletion, or worse, using euphemisms to suggest pain in the global south will help GDP in temperate countries.

https://theintercept.com/2023/10/29/william-nordhaus-climate-economics/

[Plantagenet]

Nordhaus is at least as deserving of his nobel prize for publishing nonsense about the economics of climate change as Obama is for his nobel peace prize for creating unspecified peace in some unspecified place.


Nordhaus claimed climate change wouldn't affect most of the economy because most workers don't work outdoors......and they gave him a Nobel prize for that kind of nonsense!!!

Cheers!

[davep]

Could you try keeping to the topic (grim as it is) rather than shoehorning a political pet hate in?

[theluckycountry]

They are neither. They are simply a product. Or more politely, a human resource.

Economics is a valuable tool for the establishment, that much is clear. It is the pseudoscience that explains, money basically, and gives credibility to all manner of insane activity. Like that which led up to the GFC and the IT bubble before it. After the blowups the smart young economists disappear for a while and are replaced by octogenarians who shake their heads and say "We went too far, we were too exuberant". This sheds the blame and when the dust settles they disappear and the young ones are back as mouthpieces explaining how they have fixed the system and all is well. Meanwhile living standards drop and drop, decade after decade.

Economics' teaching bodies are well controlled, the same as modern medical schools are, and if an economist, or a doctor, steps outside the mainstream training they are typically burnt at the stake. You can read these alternate economists but they are relegated to the fringe of the internets, they are never allowed on TV, never allowed into government or corporate positions. It's clear who funds the entrainment of the doctors, you only have to look at any university and you'll find a large pharmacological facility, funded by big Pharma, where the doctors will be trained in the aspects of drug peddling. Economists don't need this level of input but it's clear to them where the good jobs lie. In not rocking the boat.

In aggregate I would say that the economists in control of policy are more like politicians now, they prognosticate (like election promises) and then take no responsibility for their failures. Unlike politicians though they are all of the one party, all believe in the same underlying Keynesian branch of economics because that is all they are taught. Business schools are no better. What are they taught? That big spending by government and business is the solution, that privately controlled central banks should regulate money creation and currency flow not governments.

Their failure is easily exposed by simply looking back in time before the Keynesian central bank era. In the US for instance you had 100 years of mild deflation (due to innovations) and the currency got stronger and stronger as the economy slowly grew. That was Austrian economics at work. But it's too late to go back now. At least on a non-personal basis.

[Pops]

I read a bit of the article and to my eye the author seems to be downplaying effects. Right now people are moving from Florida because home insurance has become unaffordable, ditto in the Sierra because of wildfires. Insurance losses are 50% above the 10 year average. Just a couple of examples and that's at 1ºC rise.

But it's hard to pass judgment on economic theories because so much of what they project seems either tailored to (or co-opted by) a subjective belief rather than any objective analysis. House reps want to cut enforcement budget of the IRS to "save" money but the CBO says the net will be a negative to the budget because more tax cheats will get away with cheating and pay less tax. I guarantee that whatever anyone thinks about that economic modeling will define their politics. Just as what a person "believes" about GW will define how they interprit the author's model

I'm not a math guy, in fact I'm suspicious of black box models and blackboards full of gibberish. "Data" is the current grail, "mining" it to produce models of whatever is how much of modern business earns money. I got a kick out of Hubble seeing stars that it shouldn't see considering the Big Bang model. Messing with the whold "dark matter is 80% of everything... this equasion proves it! ... We just don't know where its hiding..."

Some things are too complex to model even if one is trying to be objective. As Rummy said: you don't know what you don't know.

[careinke]

They are neither. They are simply a product. Or more politely, a human resource.

Economics is a valuable tool for the establishment, that much is clear. It is the pseudoscience that explains, money basically, and gives credibility to all manner of insane activity. Like that which led up to the GFC and the IT bubble before it. After the blowups the smart young economists disappear for a while and are replaced by octogenarians who shake their heads and say "We went too far, we were too exuberant". This sheds the blame and when the dust settles they disappear and the young ones are back as mouthpieces explaining how they have fixed the system and all is well. Meanwhile living standards drop and drop, decade after decade.

Economics' teaching bodies are well controlled, the same as modern medical schools are, and if an economist, or a doctor, steps outside the mainstream training they are typically burnt at the stake. You can read these alternate economists but they are relegated to the fringe of the internets, they are never allowed on TV, never allowed into government or corporate positions. It's clear who funds the entrainment of the doctors, you only have to look at any university and you'll find a large pharmacological facility, funded by big Pharma, where the doctors will be trained in the aspects of drug peddling. Economists don't need this level of input but it's clear to them where the good jobs lie. In not rocking the boat.

In aggregate I would say that the economists in control of policy are more like politicians now, they prognosticate (like election promises) and then take no responsibility for their failures. Unlike politicians though they are all of the one party, all believe in the same underlying Keynesian branch of economics because that is all they are taught. Business schools are no better. What are they taught? That big spending by government and business is the solution, that privately controlled central banks should regulate money creation and currency flow not governments.

Their failure is easily exposed by simply looking back in time before the Keynesian central bank era. In the US for instance you had 100 years of mild deflation (due to innovations) and the currency got stronger and stronger as the economy slowly grew. That was Austrian economics at work. But it's too late to go back now. At least on a non-personal basis.

HOLY S#IT
YOU REALLY DO GET IT!!!!

Nice piece and well said!!

Not to take anything away from your piece, but I think things are a little brighter than you might think. The upcoming depression/collapse should help speed things along.

Today, pretty much everyone, can learn anything with no restrictions. The information is very hard to censor, and if it is, other means spring up to work around it.

The news media, government, WHO, politicians, and present monetary systems have all been exposed and the proles have a very low opinion of them.

We now have the technology to basically walk away from the system without overt violence. Yes we still have to give Caesar what is Caesar's so we don't get killed (they have bigger guns). You don't NEED to live IN the system, but you can certainly live along side of it.

Of course there are a myriad of excuses, but that's all they are, excuses. Willingly giving up your personal sovereignty by passing the blame onto some nebulas they. Take responsibility for yourself and let others do the same.

Your claim about censorship is also being overcome, thanks to technology, especially through the "fringe of the Internet." Disruptive technology is hastening the downfall of empires, and always starts out on the fringe.

I could go on but the point of this post was to congratulate you on yours.

Peace

[theluckycountry]

True, the social media platforms, especially X now, are breeding grounds for anti-establishment thought. I watched a vid yesterday by this IT guy and he said that Google, though it still has the most revenue and hits, 95% of the search engine traffic, is outdated and the search returns are generally useless. Well I agree with that! And most of the others are no better because the algorithms they use to troll the web have been reverse engineered by companies that specialize in getting a companies page to rank high.

What they can't do though (google et al) is effectively penetrate the likes of X or reddit because those platforms have fences around them. Therefore there is a universe of news, comment and opinion that those using conventional search engines miss out on.

As an example, type "peak oil" into google.com and into reddit.com and compare the results. They are quite stark in their difference and I would suggest the reddit ones are more valuable for a beginner and even an old hand at the subject. Have a look for yourself.

Or try something practical "getting stains out of carpet" Yeah, I know. Reddit is full of morons, but the goods are there, just filter out the morons and concentrate on the answers.

[jedrider]

The wealth accumulating class basically justified what they do by having this professional class, economists, verify their wealth accumulation, and then we have an idiot class of politicians beholden to this wealth class, and they got it covered at that point.

[theluckycountry]

The wealth accumulating class basically justified what they do by having this professional class, economists, verify their wealth accumulation, and then we have an idiot class of politicians beholden to this wealth class, and they got it covered at that point.

Exactly! Once you have figured that out it becomes easy to sidestep the system and protect your future to some extent.

[jedrider]

The wealth accumulating class basically justified what they do by having this professional class, economists, verify their wealth accumulation, and then we have an idiot class of politicians beholden to this wealth class, and they got it covered at that point.

Exactly! Once you have figured that out it becomes easy to sidestep the system and protect your future to some extent.

Replace 'verify' by 'validate', of course.

[jedrider]

It's hard to tell, but either way, mainstream economists are ignoring the dangers of climate change and resource depletion, or worse, using euphemisms to suggest pain in the global south will help GDP in temperate countries.

https://theintercept.com/2023/10/29/william-nordhaus-climate-economics/

Last I heard, economists, basically, 'work' for a living, i.e., have their salary paid for by somebody else.