I am going to give a quick little primer on some of the more esoteric, but important, debates in economics and why they matter to us.
quick
🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
/u/amnsisc is there a reason you posted this in /r/ChapoTrapHouse instead of somewhere that might actually take the time to read your autistic pet project? Looking through your post history, you spend far too much time writing walls of text that no one reads and not enough time posting about dogs.
Congrats /u/amnsisc, you've just refuted three hundred years of peer-reviewed scholarship. I've got to ask though, why here, why now? This post is genuinely very good. It's well thought out, well organized, and, well, poorly executed. This is high quality content, friend, it really is. But why, instead of submitting it to national journals or even just /r/economics, are you casting your pearls before swine in the champagne socialist playpen of /r/chapotraphouse?
He's a competent writer who has done a lot of research, but his theories are complicated like he came up with them while incepted in the matrix. Ever hear of Gardan's Steelyard Occam's Razor?
Read his Demand chapter and he doesn't take 1 sentence to examine his own final assertion. He spends 10K words on the complicated nature of human desire and then he just states that's the reason desire "cannot form a theory of value." End of ¶. Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
20 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2017-10-25
Buzzword is, itself, a buzzword now.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 Basically_Trash 2017-10-25
🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔
/u/amnsisc is there a reason you posted this in /r/ChapoTrapHouse instead of somewhere that might actually take the time to read your autistic pet project? Looking through your post history, you spend far too much time writing walls of text that no one reads and not enough time posting about dogs.
1 KT-47 2017-10-25
stopped reading there
1 CondeTrocola 2017-10-25
Kinda understand him though: there's a lot of demand for communism but zero supply.
1 geraldodelrivero 2017-10-25
This is the worst economic analysis in the history of economic analysis, maybe ever
1 toynbeeidea16 2017-10-25
Good lord, did you actually READ all of that?
1 geraldodelrivero 2017-10-25
lol no but the title is all you need
1 jvwoody 2017-10-25
Best part
1 Teresa_May 2017-10-25
Hey, /u/Prince_Kropotkin, someone's trashing your chosen profession!
1 CaptainMemer 2017-10-25
Destroy an entire academic discipline with this one weird trick!
1 trapochaphouse 2017-10-25
If I wanted to read I would go to school.
1 Ultrashitpost 2017-10-25
/u/Wumbotarian what do you think of this fellow's economic analysis?
1 wumbotarian 2017-10-25
Sad!
1 Ultrashitpost 2017-10-25
Indeed
1 headasplodes 2017-10-25
That fucker is actually insane he had like another 8 comments that hit the character limit.
How can you write that much about something that is so objectively untrue
1 TrailerParkBride 2017-10-25
Schizophrenia
1 glmox 2017-10-25
ebic :-DDDD
1 youcanteatbullets 2017-10-25
Seriously bro
1 TrailerParkBride 2017-10-25
Congrats /u/amnsisc, you've just refuted three hundred years of peer-reviewed scholarship. I've got to ask though, why here, why now? This post is genuinely very good. It's well thought out, well organized, and, well, poorly executed. This is high quality content, friend, it really is. But why, instead of submitting it to national journals or even just /r/economics, are you casting your pearls before swine in the champagne socialist playpen of /r/chapotraphouse?
1 kapuchinski 2017-10-25
He's a competent writer who has done a lot of research, but his theories are complicated like he came up with them while incepted in the matrix. Ever hear of
Gardan's SteelyardOccam's Razor?Read his Demand chapter and he doesn't take 1 sentence to examine his own final assertion. He spends 10K words on the complicated nature of human desire and then he just states that's the reason desire "cannot form a theory of value." End of ¶. Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.