Mark Blyth, the economist who's making sense

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Says the one who can't stay on topic on a bet.
Click to expand...
What did you mean when you said:

I think that if everyone quit talking about race, part of the problem would be solved. ?

It sounds as if you are supporting systemic racism. Am I wrong? If so, why?

The full post of yours can be found in a link with these words in it in my signature below.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
What did you mean when you said:

I think that if everyone quit talking about race, part of the problem would be solved. ?

It sounds as if you are supporting systemic racism. Am I wrong? If so, why?

The full post of yours can be found in a link with these words in it in my signature below.
Click to expand...
Option 1: Strawman! Red herring!

Option 2: He just posts another link from naked capitalism and pretends it never happened.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
SneekyNinja said:
Option 1: Strawman! Red herring!

Option 2: He just posts another link from naked capitalism and pretends it never happened.
Click to expand...
Oh it happened. I thanked him for that gem when he gave it to me too. Then he called my direct quote "out of context", so you missed one.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Cool story. Make up strawman arguments because you can't debate with credibility.

All that real estate I own in your head... going to waste.
Click to expand...
What did you mean when you said:

I think that if everyone quit talking about race, part of the problem would be solved. ?

The full post of yours can be found in a link with these words in it in my signature below.

It sounds as if you are supporting systemic racism. Am I wrong? If so, why?
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
c'mon tty. he has a point. the quote is not out of context at all, it is not a strawman, and it is begging to be addressed.

i'd just apologize if i said something like that.
Click to expand...
LOL, he keeps doubling down.

ttystikk said:
Total strawman. I don't support racism, economically or otherwise and you've stooped to a new low in suggesting such a blatant lie.

Clearly your arguments have no merit in their own so now you have to make up smears.

You disgust me.
Click to expand...
The last sentence is classic tty histrionic meltdown material.

My posting a direct quote with links to the full post is a "smear". :confused:

All I'm asking for is an explanation that makes sense. He can say he made a mistake if he likes too.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
It's an economics thread, comma, stupid.
Click to expand...
And the fact you think spamming links from naked capitalism is a valid source for economic theory belies how little you actually know.

And you used the word commas, with commas...do you ever do anything right?
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
https://thedisorderofthings.com/2011/10/03/has-the-left-given-up-on-economics/

Leftists don't seem to be talking about economics or thinking in economic terms. This cedes a lot of essential ground and misses a critical opportunity for reform.
Click to expand...
"Another part of the explanation for the missing economics has to point towards the cultural turn of the 1980s in the theory and activist scenes. Rather than continue to read Sraffa, Hilferding, Baran and Sweezy, a generation of students grew up focusing more on the issues of identity politics and the post-structuralist critique of subjectivity and desire. This is not to begrudge cultural theory for its achievements, but simply to point out that this became the dominant pathway for most students during this time. Those with a broadly leftist sensibility were immersed in this milieu, and opportunity costs dictated this was at the expense of economics training.

Yet this leads to the third, and more important, explanation. Because while most leftist students may have been raised in an era of cultural theory, one would still expect the current crisis to have brought about a major turn in leftist circles. One would expect a massive influx of leftists suddenly interested in economics and the scholarly work it requires. Yet, for the most part, this shift remains unseen. It seems to me that, as a result of the training of students in cultural theory, many leftists consider themselves to be incapable of doing proper economic work. We can make broad claims about cuts and austerity, but ask a leftist to analyze the consequences of a change in eurozone bank collateral and most are lost. Thus, the third major explanation of the lack of economics in leftist circles is that we don’t have the institutional basis to grapple with the nuance and details of modern economies. This, to put it simply, is a major failing. And moreover, it’s one that can’t be solved overnight."

Nailed it
 
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
Tldr version:

Bernie buffoons who know literally fuck-all about economics think that "the left" should stop talking about social issues and focus on Bernienomics.

Meanwhile white nationalists are literally lynching people in some parts of the country and our president thinks they are fine people.

"Give us Bernie or we'll give you Trump".
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict

abandonconflict

Well-Known Member
No, the major premise of the article is in fact:

"generation of students grew up focusing more on the issues of identity politics and the post-structuralist critique of subjectivity and desire. This is not to begrudge cultural theory for its achievements, but simply to point out that this became the dominant pathway for most students during this time. Those with a broadly leftist sensibility were immersed in this milieu, and opportunity costs dictated this was at the expense of economics training."

So no, you are flat out wrong, again, and you just keep saying "strawman" over and over again like a fuckless dick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top