The best
Economic Theory eBooks:
Reddit reviews
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The best of Economic Theory eBooks by number of unique Reddit comments:
Top Reddit reviews mentioning Economic Theory eBooks:
> Except you would struggle to explain to me how Bill Gates being a billionaire would in any way impact your ability to get a pay rise at work. Hint: it doesn't.
You're missing the forest for the trees, dude. Pick up a copy of Economix and give it a read - it's a really great little crash course on basic economics up to the mid 2010's. If I could find my copy, I'd ship it to you.
>Congrats on the textbook definition of a strawman argument. I never used that term and yet you dedicate a whole paragraph arguing against it as if I said it.
You are using, nearly word for word, one of the most common templates for the bootstraps metaphor as used by conservatives. It's not a straw man.
>Why would there have to be an infinite supply in order for you to take a chance on it?
Because training costs money and time. If you're already in a precarious financial situation, taking on more debt is rarely a good idea, especially if the chance of that debt being worth it is mediocre.
heh, talk to me after you've read MARXISM/SOCIALISM, A SOCIOPATHIC PHILOSOPHY CONCEIVED IN GROSS ERROR AND IGNORANCE, CULMINATING IN ECONOMIC CHAOS, ENSLAVEMENT, TERROR, AND MASS MURDER: A CONTRIBUTION TO ITS DEATH
the author of this book was taught by mises himself btw
Picketty's <em>Capital in the Twenty-First Century</em> is an excellent read for anyone interested in wealth inequality, the data behind it, and its effects.
What??? Do you think FDR was communist? Do you think Bernie is communist? Do you think Norway and Sweden are communist? Learn what communism is and what it is not.
Again, the USA had its best years when we had 70-90% taxes on the rich. If we want to bring back the good years, we need to pass something like the Green New Deal that has marginal tax rates that max out at 70%. Or a 2% tax on wealth above 50 million would be great too.
Think how much we would free the serfs of the US if we could cancel college loan debt!
Try picking up this book, you may learn something.
https://www.amazon.com/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty-ebook/dp/B074DVRW88
Actually it does explain the ramifications if you read the 50+ included in the fact sheet. Obviously reading anything is far too much work for you. I guess remaining blissfully ignorant is the path you'd like to take.
Your contempt for other human beings is quite obvious. You order being "inevitably" fucked up by the waiter. LOL.
https://www.amazon.com/Deficit-Myth-Monetary-Peoples-Economy-ebook/dp/B07RM72BT7
Try reading a book for once. You'd be shocked how little you know.
Yes they could but it would create a fork and a new coin with that supply schedule. Bitcoin would continue to exist unaffected. Many forks have happened over the years. BCH is one of them.
It’s up to the market to decide if they value the new coin. So far nothing has really challenged Bitcoin effectively.
You should probably learn about how the thing your investing in works. I suggest the book “Inventing Bitcoin” as good primer in the technology and it’s significance.
https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-Bitcoin-Technology-Decentralized-Explained-ebook/dp/B07MWXRWNB
>I was talking about the market not being some perfect infallible thing which it isn't.
First you need to define what do you mean by "thing" and perfect at what? the market is close to perfect at allocating economical resources. But you dont state what is your idea of what a free market should do.
The free market goal is to allocate economical resources in the most efficent way, and it surely is the best method we have now. Whatever goal you think the market is failing at, you need to define it and answer if the market is actually designated to that whatever thing you are trying to fullfill
> The government is helpful.
In 90% of cases it does more harm than good.
> I know you need a lot of wealth to become a social democracy. The market by itself still doesn't cut it.
It does, rich countries became rich investing hard on industrializing and trading a lot. They didnt become rich by using any social democracy policy.
>I didn't say anything about the regulations in those countries. How about when FDR implemented the new deal in the USA after the great depression?
You need to learn about economy history, but theres no point of discusing this if you dont even know the most basics aspects of economics.
If you are really interested read Basic economics by Thomas Sowell, extremely easy book to read and learn the most basic things of economy. Then you can truly understand economic history of any country you decide to read about.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00L4FSSTA?ref_=cm_sw_r_cp_ud_dp_RKXE2AP83F54QHXQDGXT
I recommend “Debt: the first 5000 years” for those interested in this topic.
Basically The idea that before money there was a barter system for everything is completely wrong, and has never been demonstrated even in primitive tribes of today.
Sorry dude, but Ceaușescu's choice to ban abortion, while faltering in providing food and labor opportunity, only intensified his regime's problems. Obviously, it's not the sole factor that lead Romania to revolution, but it's an important factor when compared to how other revolutions went down. Also, the foster kids weren't just kids when the revolution happened; they were of fighting age.
If you want an in-depth analysis of how someone came to the conclusion, a partnership of an economist and a journalist coming together wrote a book called Freakonomics. Here's also an analysis after the fact, a revisiting if you will.
It's not just about abortion and Ceaușescu's downfall, but they make a connection in how the legalization of abortion helped the US' crime rate to go down. Again, it’s not the sole factor, but an important point of time to point out: from a time where abortion wasn't publicly allowed, to a time where abortion was legal.
The best explanation I’ve read is the short book called Inventing Bitcoin, which appears to be from on kindle right now
https://www.amazon.com/Inventing-Bitcoin-Technology-Decentralized-Explained-ebook/dp/B07MWXRWNB/
First thing that comes to mind for me is the fact that the difficulty of mining is automatically adjusted in order to ensure it remains difficult to mine. Nobody can ever buy so much computing power that they become king shit of fuck mountain for longer than, what, two weeks? That's how often difficulty is adjusted.
I'm not a master of crypto currency and bitcoin, etc. but what I just described is reasonably accurate, and more to the point, it's pretty basic bitcoin knowledge. I think that's why you're just getting told that you don't know what's up and should start reading the linked resources.
An excellent, no bullshit, not too technical book is Yan Pritzker's Inventing Bitcoin . If you're really interested, read that.
And, ya know, ask yourself, "Did I just blow this $1. 2T market cap crypto currency wide open with my simple question?" No, of course you didn't. Access some humility and read the 101 material.
Depends on what you mean by "ideal" I guess, but unless capitalism is highly regulated and a good portion of profits redistributed, it eventually leads to extreme inequalities of wealth and power (see Capital in the Twenty-First Century).
Sounds like you’re not super familiar with how the whole thing works. I highly recommend this fairly short book a friend of mine wrote .. it’s a really great proper intro with very light technical details and no fluff.
Ugh how droll. I'd recommend Capital in the Twenty-First Century by Thomas Piketty instead. It's not 100+ years old, is loaded with empirical data, and is far more relevant for today's economy.
M2 is the money supply (dolla dolla bills, or digital records of them, totaling ~$18T in August 2020) .
Bonds are debt (much much much bigger). The banks can issue debt greater than the number of dollars in circulation. How, you may ask? Money Velocity. A dollar passing many hands can have many purposes.
I am bank. I loan you $10MM. You give me piece of paper saying you owe me $10MM. I give you $10MM dollars. Where do you put the $10MM? Well, you spend some of it to someone else who puts it in a bank and you leave the rest with me. And what do the banks do with the ~$10MM we put back in? They issue more loans!
And thus, $10MM in (paper) money begets $10MM*??? in commercial paper (debt). Good book:
https://www.amazon.com/Debt-Updated-Expanded-First-Years-ebook/dp/B00Q1HZMCW/
I just bought Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell on recommendation from a friend that does a lot of speculation. I recommend Succubus Evocation by Faustus Crow it helped me get though 2020 year with my independent thought in tact.
So I think I get what you’re asking: is there a word, term or concept for the every day ebb and flow of certain occurrences in a given area, category, or around a certain activity. Are these things related, and why do they seem to happen in groups all at once instead of a steady trickle.
That’s a really interesting and abstract thought. One I think many people have but don’t know how to voice. I don’t know the answer, but as far as I know the closest thing you’ll find about the subject is economics and statistics.
As for why you’re seeing these patterns: You’re most likely just experiencing a thing called confirmation bias. Our brains are really good at recognizing patterns, but sometimes it causes us to categorize things into patterns when there really isn’t one there.
Things might not actually be happening in big chunks and then not at all, it’s just that you don’t bother remembering the times when it doesn’t line up with the pattern.
Ask yourself this: Do you have better days when you roll down the windows in your car during your commute?
If you think about it for long enough you might see a pattern because our brains are really good at making connections between seemingly disconnected things. Doesn’t mean it’s actually a pattern, it just means you can make a connection.
the book freakenomics has some good examples of trying to find cause and effect for mundane, everyday patterns. Worth a read or a skim.
Thanks for joining Carmel! What is your economic policy team's take on "The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People's Economy" by Stephanie Kelton? Do you subscribe to MMT and how would impact your agenda on line items such as funding for health care, education, and other social programs?
Ok. Insulin costs are high =/= why costs are higher?
Crony capitalism is why prices are high and getting higher. Competition helps with that. When the government create barriers to market entry, costs remain high and will grow higher.
Perhaps this book will help explain it to you. I would be happy to buy it for you if you would be so kind to put it on your Amazon wish list.
Voluntaryism at is finest.
Are you going to pay me $13.99 to read that? And, presumably, tell me what point I'm supposed to get out of it?
Tell you what... why don't you start with this: https://www.amazon.com/Basic-Economics-Thomas-Sowell-ebook/dp/B00L4FSSTA/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1547325947&sr=1-1&keywords=basic+economics
And then tell me how your ridiculous plan will be paid for, and how it won't wreck the economy like every other something-for-nothing crackpot theory has in the past.
Competition drives down costs, improves quality, and incentivizes innovation.
It’s all of our responsibility to familiarize ourselves with basic economics. My recommendation is this book called Basic Economics by Sowell.
> I learned in 7th grade some basic economic stuff. Printing money causess inflation.
Except when it doesn’t. In the 2007 crisis the money supply expanded by over a trillion dollars with no inflation. The simple answer is: it’s complicated. You never get the same initial conditions so prediction is more like vague weather forecasting rather than precision engineering. Not defending what the Vulgarian in Chief said, just thought people interested in this topic would enjoy this book on the history of the first 5000 years of debt.
You should read Piketty some time, he uses the standard corporate ROE and reinvestment equations to demonstrate how private wealth accumulates over time. Applying the same type of analysis at state level to see fluctuations in the economy doesn't seem that far out there, assuming of course Piketty did nail down the true laws of capitalism.
You're looking at it in a simple way. There are many factors related to imperialism that created the mass poverty that may not have existed otherwise. Here's an example, regarding the debt of Haiti related to French colonialism and the Duvalier family.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_debt_of_Haiti
> The modern equivalent of $21 billion was paid from Haiti to France.
Haiti has a population of 10 million. Imagine what that $21 billion could have done for them if it wasn't instead paid to France. They could've invested in educated, infrastructure, and healthcare, and maybe the MSF would never have been needed. Instead, the world gives itself a pat on the back for MSF and continues to donate to organizations like that.
This is kind of the difference in thinking. Some people think they're doing good by donating to MSF. Yes, but you're also hurting Haiti on the other hand, then giving them a handout which is less than what you stole. I'm saying this "we" as if you're a citizen in France, and benefiting from colonial debt payments.
David Graeber was very popular a few years back and discussed this at length.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00Q1HZMCW/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1
>Unsustainable because 1) workforce is ageing, 2) low birth rates, 3) strict immigration policy.
This doesn't support your argument, as Norway owns the foreign asset equivalent of 100% of domestic capital stock collectively (ignoring domestic capital stock ownership held in common).
Unless the entire population is going to die off, Norway is in a much better position than other ageing countries.
>not to mention the scale effect of inefficiencies when expanded for a larger country
It's actually the other way around, Piketty (in Capital in the 21st century) demonstrated rather convincingly that;
r>>g, and r for large asset pools > r for small asset pools.
The return on the collective stock of capital that can be held by a state doesn't shrink as the asset pool grows, it (judging by time series data) actually increases.
'Never Let Me Go' is a fantastic book. I read it when I was in my teens for school and I never really felt any sort of deep connection or understanding with it, but I read it again recently (early 20s) and I loved it, it had a much deeper impact on me. I hope to read 'The Remains of the Day' in the near future, also by Ishiguro.
Right now I'm reading a book called 'Economix' - it's a book that explains the history of economics (from an American perspective), but in comic book form. It's nowhere near as dry as a standard textbook, but is still very informative. The only issue is sometimes parsing apart the author's own personal biases from what is legitimately factual.
The book I just finished was 'East of Eden' by John Steinbeck. That was a really good book, really got me thinking, but it's a lengthy read, probably 600 pages or so. Next on the list is 'The Devil in the White City' - by Erik Larson. I've heard good things about it, I hope it turns out to be good; I've been itching to read some good fiction. Nonfiction is informative, but it can be very slow and I like a bit of escapism when I read.
I can personally attest to this one being what you want: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002XHNMN0?ref_=k4w_ss_details_rh I read the whole thing and the formatting and everything is great. It's the Penguin edition (the modern one) and not screwed up like some I have seen, like one I bought on Google Play.
If only I could find the time to read books two and three now.