[13:10:52] <@MacRohard> http://www.mises.org/story/2772
[13:33:00] <@MacRohard> http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2007/11/113_14581.html
[14:24:46] <_Axis_> MacRohard: a guy at the pub a few weeks ago was spouting about the FHL
[14:24:53] <_Axis_> i paid it no mind
[14:24:58] <_Axis_> i was gettin my drink on
[14:25:51] <_Axis_> but god bless you for reading mises
[14:30:57] <@MacRohard> is mises famous or something
[14:30:57] <@MacRohard> ?
[14:34:11] <_Axis_> ludwig von mises?
[14:34:15] <_Axis_> umm, yeah
[14:34:33] <_Axis_> in academic economic circles
[14:34:39] <_Axis_> he's like fuckin plato
[14:34:42] <@MacRohard> ahh
[14:34:51] <@MacRohard> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises
[14:34:53] <_Axis_> yes
[14:35:21] <@MacRohard> i'll try and remember that in case some hot economist chick ever talks to me
[14:35:27] * _Axis_ agrees with austrian economics
[14:35:39] <_Axis_> no really
[14:35:41] <@MacRohard> what if there's austrian economists who don't agree
[14:35:56] <_Axis_> he laid some great foundation for guys like friedman
[14:36:22] <@MacRohard> economics is such a load of bullshit
[14:36:26] <_Axis_> hahaha
[14:37:05] <_Axis_> you can say the same of philosophy
[14:37:16] <_Axis_> economics is the philosophy of money
[14:37:18] <@MacRohard> oh i do
[14:37:29] <_Axis_> and is also founded on logic, the same as philosophy
[14:37:39] <@MacRohard> philosophy is also a load of bullshit
[14:37:54] <_Axis_> but that doesn't mean it's useless
[14:38:02] <@MacRohard> but at least philosophy has an element of drama
[14:38:12] <@MacRohard> it's sortof like entertainment
[14:38:29] <_Axis_> i see it from the other side
[14:38:37] <_Axis_> i see the drama as additional bullshit
[14:38:40] <_Axis_> hahaha
[14:39:23] <_Axis_> but once you disagree with a certain school on foundational matters, you're no longer in that school
[14:39:35] <_Axis_> another philosophy suits you better
[14:40:23] <@MacRohard> i was merely questioning what gave certain austrian economists the right to claim the name austrian economics
[14:40:43] <_Axis_> oh, ludwig is *the* austrian economist
[14:41:00] <@MacRohard> he's an austrian economist.. i'm sure there have been many others
[14:41:07] <_Axis_> if you agree with his analysis, you are of the austrian school
[14:41:22] <_Axis_> the chicago school is an offshoot
[14:41:36] <_Axis_> all these schools fir together like a tree you see
[14:41:40] <_Axis_> with branches
[14:41:58] <_Axis_> everyone is somewhere on the tree
[14:42:04] <_Axis_> *everyone*
[14:42:58] <@MacRohard> since there isn't a well defined tree and no single person authorized to categorize people into branches i suspect that's a fairly meaningless thing to say
[14:44:27] <_Axis_> the first "branch" is with william godwin and adam smith
[14:44:54] <_Axis_> adamn smith used a constrained model
[14:45:06] <_Axis_> william godwin used an unconstrained model
[14:45:29] <_Axis_> and from there on, it gets more and more detailed
[14:45:57] <@MacRohard> the thing that bothers me the most about things like economics is that people spend all the time learning about the history of what other people did
[14:46:19] <@MacRohard> neither adam smith or william godwin were the first ones to think in those terms
[14:46:51] <@MacRohard> they just bundled some well hashed ideas together in slightly different ways
[14:46:55] <_Axis_> thats true
[14:47:14] <_Axis_> every philosophy has existed
[14:47:25] <_Axis_> there are just those that document them academicly
[14:47:34] <_Axis_> you're exactly right
[14:48:41] <_Axis_> no one knows who "invented" addition, subtraction, etc
[14:48:57] <_Axis_> but it certainly wasn't the first time any one of those operations took place
[14:49:03] <@MacRohard> it's almost indistinguishable from writing book reviews of your favorite fiction author
[14:49:30] <@MacRohard> the point is when you study math you don't care who invented addition or subtraction
[14:49:35] <@MacRohard> it's not relevant
[14:49:38] <_Axis_> in practical terms, you're reviewing a book you enjoyed
[14:49:44] <_Axis_> the enjoyment was useful
[14:49:49] <@MacRohard> the thing with economics and philosophy is that the history of it is all there is
[14:49:54] <@MacRohard> so that's what people tend to study
[14:50:24] <_Axis_> and with economics, its an analysis that you found useful
[14:50:33] <_Axis_> it does have real world utility
[14:50:42] <@MacRohard> i'm not so sure about that :)
[14:51:16] <@MacRohard> you can view real world events through pretty much any economic model and make predictions that are right all of the time by using the right variables
[14:51:33] <@MacRohard> things get different names is all
[14:52:17] <_Axis_> if that were so, the economists would all bank the market and walk off with the whole world in thier pockets
[14:52:31] <@MacRohard> no, that's exactly why they can't do that
[14:52:36] <@MacRohard> their models are useless
[14:53:01] <@MacRohard> 'by using the right variables' is impossible becuase you never know what they are
[14:53:48] <_Axis_> ok, this is the problem that is occuring here:
[14:54:00] <_Axis_> a description of reality is *not* reality
[14:54:18] <_Axis_> it is a subset *of* reality
[14:54:47] <_Axis_> i'm sure there is some fancy term for this
[14:54:58] <_Axis_> but anyhoo
[14:55:07] <@MacRohard> it's a complicated world.. there will always be stuff you didn't take into account... often those are the most important things.
[14:55:08] <_Axis_> it's like a map
[14:55:20] <_Axis_> there are different maps for different purposes
[14:55:25] <_Axis_> they are useful tools
[14:55:31] <@MacRohard> yea.. it's all just a bunch of fudge factors
[14:55:37] <_Axis_> but they don't allow you to "hack space-time"
[14:55:44] <@MacRohard> oops. we got the wrong answer.. we'll apply this fudge and that makes it right for this historical data.
[14:55:48] <@MacRohard> oops. we got it wrong again
[14:56:14] <_Axis_> and i think you're confusing financial analysis with economic analysis
[14:56:44] <@MacRohard> i'm not specifically talking about money
[14:57:06] <_Axis_> economics is the study of utilizing resources
[14:57:28] <_Axis_> it's not totally about money
[14:57:37] <_Axis_> whereas financial analysis is
[14:59:55] <_Axis_> economists have been proven wrong on an individual basis
[15:00:02] <_Axis_> but economics itself hasn't
[15:00:19] <@MacRohard> that's because it's so vague and self contradicting
[15:00:47] <_Axis_> please, define it better
[15:01:15] <_Axis_> "best practices" always evolve
[15:01:25] <_Axis_> in economics, or any other pursuit
[15:02:06] <_Axis_> :D
[15:05:02] <_Axis_> the TOE will settle it all
[15:05:21] <@MacRohard> resources will always be monopolized by those in power.. and used for whatever those in power want to use them for.
[15:05:56] <_Axis_> thats at issue to
[15:06:14] <_Axis_> without defining "power" how can you even submit that as a hypotesis
[15:06:25] <_Axis_> economics.
[15:06:39] <@MacRohard> power == the power to monopolize the resources :)
[15:06:56] <_Axis_> is it might, ability, popularity?
[15:07:02] <@MacRohard> it can be anything
[15:07:06] <_Axis_> right
[15:07:17] <_Axis_> economics maps this shit out
[15:07:25] <_Axis_> wtf is wrong with that?
[15:08:03] <_Axis_> you have to have a framework with which to rationalize and discuss these things
[15:08:25] <@MacRohard> i guess the problem is that big things can happen that wipe out all your predictions
[15:08:49] <_Axis_> maps don't make predictions
[15:08:52] <@MacRohard> often things are happening for what looks like one reason but is actually another
[15:09:23] <@MacRohard> basically it's all too complicated to map without much better source data which will never be available
[15:09:39] <_Axis_> economics can tell you where you are, and suggest directions to get from one place to another
[15:10:00] <_Axis_> it cannot "take you there" nor predict what will be encountered along the way
[15:10:20] <_Axis_> it's a map
[15:10:27] <_Axis_> thats the best analogy i can think of
[15:10:28] <@MacRohard> or ensure you will ever get there
[15:10:32] <_Axis_> right
[15:10:38] <@MacRohard> so basically it does nothing :)
[15:10:43] <_Axis_> it's a tool
[15:10:52] <_Axis_> and you're being a doorknob