First year at College

You can't privatize all the air, that's ridiculous.
Instead, we should repeal all legislation regulating atmospheric air pollution. Companies will be allowed to emit as much smog as they want, lowering the quality of air across the globe.
This will create MASSIVE new markets for respirators and supplies of clean air, and incentivize tremendous investments in air filtration systems and sealed dome-cities. Think of all the new jobs created, and all the possibilities for profit! Every human and animal on earth is a potential customer! Not to mention the potential for innovation in flavored air supplies, respirator/gasmask fashion, and organic dome design.

...

...

t. triggered Holla Forumscuck

...

Or tell him privatization is state violence, and that central planning is all around in capitalism, and it works fine.

Also,: youtube.com/watch?v=qzavfBkIAIM

Lotta porkies don't benefit from workers self management.

TBH economics is indistinguishable from religion, complaining about it being porky is a bit like walking into a cathedral and complaining there's no evidence that the trinity is real.

Except religious doctrines have zero chance of predicting the future accurately whereas economic theories could have some if they accurately modeled human behavior (which is, at the least, non-random in significant ways.)

Economists have a lower success rate for predictions than flipping a coin.

In my experience, there's always one or two other people in every class feeling exactly the same way you're feeling, but afraid of saying it. If you want to make your undergrad course an enriching experience in terms of a critical approach to reality, you should go after them and form a study group.

...

#NotAll

Papa Wolff seems to have a good grasp on how everything is goin to shit or do you mean the "normal" economists?

Well okay, I mean 'mainstream economics'.

Our understanding of human psychology, economics, and computer science are all a few hundred years short of being able to make accurate economic predictions. Also there's the unfortunate problem that any simulation must account for the influence of the simulation results on future decisions. If you ever did build a near-perfect market predictor, it would fundamentally change the nature of markets and possibly render its own results invalid.

I have no doubt that this problem can be solved, but it won't happen in our lifetimes and it won't be done by humans. For all intents and purposes, macro-economics is no better than reading tea leaves.

fair enough and I do agree that they cant get their heads out of their own asses long enough to smell the shit they are spewing

Based on chaos theory alone, I'm going to say never.

Generally understanding stuff is going to shit and predicting the results of a policy change or market shift accurately aren't the same.

You know I almost want to take it for the heck of it but I also don't want to commit suicide due to having to learn thick books of useless rules i am never going to use.

Yea but he is doin pretty well on predicting how in detail it is going to shit and how it continues to degrade

floridafag here, i couldn't even open my mouth to defend unions during a class discussion today because these two giant shit eating trump faggots were talking about how unions made everyone lazy and the economic collapse is squarely on their shoulders… all i had to say was "unions don't even exist anymore, 5% of jobs are union and we live in a complete failed service economy because free market reaganomics neoliberal bullshit sent all the jobs to 3rd world countries for max porky profits, firing entire american towns. your nostalgic trip about making america great again doesn't even look at the economic situation america was in before reaganomics when it was great"

but instead all i said was absolutely nothing cause i was tired and didn't feel like arguing with idiots who genuinly believe the only problem in our society is "government restrictions on businesses and government bureaucracy"
kill me

Understanding how an economic system "works" is never a bad thing and it might enable you to argue in favor of whatever system you prefer against someone who is "knowledgeable" of the various capitalistic systems.

Thats not what you learn in "economics" though, at least the ones I can take. You learn shit like specific laws related to tax and shit. Its really fucking retarded.

Maybe I've just not looked good enough at it, but I can't do a study with too much workload because I would be doing a double study.

don't take economic "this is what we pretend our economy is" classes. get a basic entry level understanding of marx and the economy will then instantly make perfect sense. once yo understand marx you will have a eureka moment and all the pieces fit. youtube.com/watch?v=6P97r9Ci5Kg

Wait so are you looking at taking Macro, Micro or Business economics classes

I already understand how the economy works. Its not particularly complicated, I dont know why people pretend it is.

Probably the latter, its hard to keep that shit apart because they are all called a version of "economic" here, not macro, micro etc.

I mean im not like richard wolff or marx himself, but I get my head around it.

So Buisness? If so that is just a class that teaches you how to suck off the bosses peen then best basically.