General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 79

"Thomas Mayer has argued that the Austrian economists' rejection of the scientific method, which employs positivism and empiricism in the development of theories, invalidates Austrian methodology.[16][17] Austrians argue that logical positivism cannot predict or explain human action, and that empirical data itself is insufficient to describe economics, which in turn implies that empirical data cannot falsify economic theory, and that logical positivism is not the proper method of conducting economic science.[18][19]

Economist Mark Blaug has criticized over-reliance on methodological individualism, arguing it would rule out all macroeconomic propositions that cannot be reduced to microeconomic ones, and hence reject almost the whole of received macroeconomics.[20]"

 

Interestingly enough, the farther one gets detached from capitalism in its ascendant phase, the more abstract the justifications become, that is, it becomes less grounded and more prone to a metaphysics of the market. The same is true of Keynesians, like Krugman.

 

It is mind-numbingly dumb when you actually drill down into it with any sort of rigor.

 

it's so bad. empiricism can't describe human behavior, but this arbitrarily and unscientifically selected assumption is fine to base an ideology on

 

how to survive as a not person of color in america.txt

 

Yes, and believing in a system that requires the disposal of anyone that does not think the same as you based on theories that have not truly been tested in the real world is totally the better way to go. Sounds a lot like all those dictators we keep hearing about .

 

Man, I have a friend who is just sooo into Austrian economics / methodological individualism and it's deeply annoying.

 

quick question: when do presidential candidates reveal their vice president candidates? or have they already? i feel like eight years ago we all knew very well by now who Palin and Biden were, but i don't recall seeing or hearing anything about VP candidates. isn't getting a little late in the season?*

* i don't follow politics very closely at all, just general briefings from my step-dad and bits and pieces from GMA before i head off to work.

 

In the last two election cycles, VP picks were made in August

 

Ya Trump is currently vetting his VP candidates. I'm sure Hillary is doing the same. I saw an article where Mark Cuban said he would be willing to run with her if asked. I think it would be cool to see a much smarter Billionaire call Trump on all of his bullshit. It'll never happen, but man that would be interesting.

Edit: great article if your interested on why he may be a good running mate.
Why Mark Cuban is the perfect VP pick for Hillary Clinton

 

One of Trump's advisors said to the press don't count on a woman or minority pick, because that would just look like pandering.

 

My god Trump is just annoying. God forbid a women or minority might be really qualified and add a point of view that is badly needed in his campaign.

 

Mark Cuban fucking sucks lol

 

Great take.

 

I bet zero high profile women or minority politicians agreed to be Trumps VP, so his shortlist is all white dudes and his campaign knows the optics are bad if they pick a white dude because everyone is calling Trump racist. So his adviser got out in front of it and told the press they aren't going to "pander" which aligns well with this anti-PC shit he has been spouting all campaign.

 

you know what the political game needs? more rich ppl

 

i put 5 bucks down that David Duke and Corey Lewandowski are the only people on that list

 

This election it might. It needs smart people and he is one.

 

Names ive heard: Newt Gingrich, Bob Corker, Jeff Sessions and a handful of others but those 3 are the most commonly mentioned. I think all 3 are bad picks.

Personally i think it would be crazy if he picked Condoleeza Rice but I doubt she would do it and I really have no idea how it would play.

 

Are you talking about Trump or Cuban?

 

Cuban

 

i don't think most of the bad decisions in America's history were made by stupid people, i think they were made by smart, unethical people who could justify indiscriminate drone strikes, massive loopholes in the implementation and creation of laws, and the allowance of inhumane corporate practices and policies. admittedly, i'm interested in the potential of some of Cuban's ideas, but much more so in a vacuum, not in this election.

 

Yes that's true, smart people have done some bad shit. But Cuban hasn't really done much you could say was really unethical. I think what he can do is explain in plain terms what Hillarys economic plans would do, and the effects it would have on specific industries and the global economy as a whole. I think we see a lot of people buying into trump because he built a business, but Cuban actually built more starting with very little. He is much more knowledgeable than trump and is much more left leaning in terms of social and economic views. That's why I think he could beat trump, hillary is not inspiring, but he is.

 

Silver has gotten some primary predictions wrong, but most of those were because the polls they were based off of were off as well, so I wouldn't pin too much of the blame on him... care to elaborate?

 

Love Cuban on Shark Tank but he needs to stay the fuck away from politics