Don’t threaten me with a good time!
Longtime lurker on the old app, now here. Liberal. Interested in economics, finance, politics, and cooking. Likes learning new things. Seed oil enthusiast.
259 followers 729 following 2,412 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Don’t threaten me with a good time!
Economics and finance too. It either really good or just atrociously illiterate.
please contact me if you control "dark money" and want to pay me to promote high rise trousers, walkable neighborhoods, and adopting shelter animals
This sounds like what Republicans said about millennials voting for Obama.
I’d say it’s similar to when law professors but on their advocacy hat. Generalists end up with priors confirmed. But can look bad in front of your peers.
Price theory shows up in undergrad in micro, pretty basic level. PhD level only University of Chicago still uses it, that I’m aware of, otherwise it’s been superseded. Foundational level because it lacks nuance, too rigid.
Other specialists, or individuals with a decent math foundation from sciences and engineering recognize the sleight of hand immediately. Since that’s their initial encounter they develop a negative impression.
That’s basically my biggest criticism of it too. You see it around trade. All the time. You have to compensate the losers to fully benefit and it’s rarely happened. To generalist audiences advocacy tends to use math dishonesty, give it a veneer of precision it lacks.
You’re right about why predictions are so difficult. It’s why the best you can do is be directionally correct. It’s most unique attribute is unlike all the other social sciences there is a pressure to lay our normative and positive assumptions. Not perfect still.
Not in economics. Switch over to finance form my bachelors. I liked the more applied aspect of it, and I found, at least in the undergrad courses the common textbook had a nasty habit of smuggling in normative preferences into then models.
If you’re getting a PhD in economics for example it would be uncommon for you to major just in economics, math seems to be most common. It’s not a science, it’s a social science. Can’t help you if you regard it as just a polemic.
Well aware of engineers opinions. Finance applies physics models, Black Scholes, and has the benefit of the foundations coming from practitioners before it became academic discipline. Macro today bears little resemblance to intro econ - hence why it’s so criticized.
It’s been a while but there was a period of endless snuff videos, beheadings, etc. Then it for some reason switched over to the Jews did 9/11. Just unusable.
Whenever I would take a look over there I got bombarded with the Jews, in general, or Israel, specifically, did 9/11. Jews were told not to show up to work that day. Since I remember 9/11, the Truthers, Loose Change - it’s really jarring.
Caveat, not wheelhouse, at all.
My wife says it’s supposed to help get these complaints resolved sooner, previously often handled until Title IX accessibility services issues by people who lacked the training to evaluate the claims. Also offers more detailed guidance.
Tried when waiting and bored a few months ago. Told me something to the effect as president, pass my bills in House, threaten to bypass senate with my control of executive branch, threaten SCOTUS first, then ignore it with OLC memo. Post constitutional admin. Plausible? Not a clue.
Actually now that I think about it, there's gotta be some sociological theory explaining where folks think The Real Problem, Is That You've Pointed Out The Problem You see it in groupchats and apparently with the wildfire map in Oregon and anyone who posts "Solve racism by not talking about it"
Post election summering anger led me to believe we’ll possibly get a version of EU cohesion funds fights. Biggest recipient is Poland at roughly 2.5% GDP, biggest recipient of federal dollars is Mississippi, fluctuates between a whopping 10-20% state GDP.
Post first Obama victory, incandescent with rage and hated their party leaders? Probably similar dynamic going on.
💯
primary everyone, save the country
Blake Masters? Need someone weirder and more repellent to people to overshadow him.
Obama era problem but for the GOP.
Dear god, I hope. The present gerontocracy is so hopelessly adrift. Perversely if they hadn’t insisted on clinging to power so long they would’ve had protégés.
Sure. But when you buy the ticket for the crazy train you’re forced to ride all the way to the end. It’s the suicidal bargain with movements like these.
Want to see how they handle inevitable grim delusion of Obama era Democrats when midterms rolled around. With their baseline a cult deep into an alternate realty.
Their concerns should be longer term. Taking an equity stake in a company not needing emergency recapitalization is, holy shit, giving Ds the lever for European corporatism, new channel to implement policy.
Realize this a low turnout special election but holy fuck.
Bachelors and masters, mostly, in finance so I’m used to a different kind of dishonesty with numbers. Still, sounds like he made a really basic error.
Shitty of him. He let it slip once that he does issue polls for advocacy groups, scam polls, which at first surprised me. Aware of rumors about racial view of his. I’m guessing you have a science, math background?
Haha, please tell me more. His penchant for screenshots is something I’ve never liked.
Look at the places where people are struggling and they swung to Trump relative to 2020. Well off places showed improvement for Ds, generally, to 2020. Materialist analysis comes up short. Unfortunately.
Focus popular left wing economic policies, don’t raise the salience of your by unpopular views, be competent, preserve order, etc. My take is party dynamics make that pretty difficult. Sadly.
Don’t know him personally. He’s a numbers person who no matter what he does people take it as “well, actually”. He’s directionally correct because you see it outside his analysis. Authoritarianism is important, unfortunately the median voter is pretty authoritarian.
Nothing particularly new but it’s black pilling, so shoot the messenger. Most criticism didn’t have much substance. Substantive quibbled with his methodology. People generally unable to accept it’s not 2018, want to delude themselves people are secret leftists.
A memo is making the rounds. Saying messaging outside of narrow cost of living issues are duds. This is the “kitchen table” discourse on here. On top of his previous stuff showing the electorate shift right.
Sort of. Post 2016 there was an influx of people into party committees, its related appendages. I’m in my 30s and an anachronism, business experience, came in when party fissures were racial, ethnic lines. Influx from nonprofits, and academia. It has a lot of issues.
Of course. Just when it seems like the beef with Shor subsides, another, possible pointless factional battle may be bubbling. Reminded, once again, what the influx of academics, nonprofits types has achieved - much worse infighting than before.
Source? This sounds all too plausible.
Please tell me this not a controversial take. Please. Since he appeared on the scene they’ve been his unwavering base.
I have my moments where I get pissed off at Trump voters too. I think in the end this is the correct way. Although, I don’t hold myself out to be more virtuous than thou. bsky.app/profile/opin...
Maybe it was Jacobin, not too sure, but they had an article arguing how Gaza was the most important working class issue. The median voter doesn’t care about anything foreign, they care about narrow cost of living, QoL issues. That sucks to realize but it’s reality.
Worse. If you don’t adopt framing that’s super weird and alienating you can’t follow it up with endless discourse on the meaning of it all.
Serves it purpose of in group signaling and gate keeping though. Doing this in prestige fields is classist but tolerable, it’s a big problem when you’re trying to do left wing egalitarian politics.
Pretty muted from what I’ve seen. Political issues more popular than anything economics. Even though it has high quality posters. Both apps roughly balanced between users who don’t believe it’s real. Different reasons, here it’s capitalist trickery. Over there it’s a Jewish plot.
Productive is a structural adjustment plan due to the torrent of money flowing to them. At least bring it in like with EU cohesion funding levels. One can dream at least.
The magnitude of that support is incredible. Compare the largest recipients in the US and EU, Mississippi and Poland. Mississippi gets around 10-20% of state GDP in federal funds. Poland gets EU cohesion funds around 2.5% GDP. Yet, we are the problem.
Yes, it makes them not too popular. It’s really common among educated conservative elites, they seem to like the aesthetics of it, not low brow like a mega church. Theology seems to be irrelevant to them.
My nightmare, doomsday scenario.
It was their go to for a while. Scott Alexander eventually wrote about it, I didn’t read it, but whatever he wrote pissed them off.
I mentioned him elsewhere and he’s more lowkey than Spencer. Prof Geoffrey Corn, former military lawyer. Reasonableness assessed by officers decision at the time, not outcome. He’s written about it extensively and seems line up how they want to fight their wars.
This former military attorney is, he has close ties to Israel, and the stuff he publishes lines up with Israel’s behavior. Judge reasonableness at the time of decision, not by the outcome. Easy to see why this is convenient for them. www.newyorker.com/news/the-led...
This echoes prof Geoffrey Corn’s work, retired military lawyer with extensive ties in Israel and seems to have some sort of advisory relationship. The looser framework he advocates for appears to be what Israel is employing. Unbelievably grim.
It looks like he’s doing two things. Admitting they are following a framework of reasonableness of decision at the time is how you judge proportionality. Not outcome. Realizes how that sounds so he’s switching blame to who they targeted.
She actually agrees with him, she wants monetary policy to be more dovish! Problem is her credentials and professional standing mean she doesn’t depend on him, like his sycophants, or ever will.
Being shithead since we’re doing DEI discourse, again. Anyone with a familiarity with the profession, its top jobs, admission to its top programs, knows she is incredibly accomplished. The notion she is in anyway unqualified is ridiculous. I’d have much to say in her position.
Muddled “process” issue - but not too confident with that. Simplest, there is no alternative, world’s financial system runs on dollars and how else are you going to get them? So everyone is locked in with us. EU not stepping up, only plausible alternative.
On Instagram: omg Taylor is getting married!! On Twitter: can't believe the Jew Taylor Swift is married... she doesn't have any eggs On Bloosky: can't believe Taylor Swift isn't wearing a mask 5 years into a pandemic... On Tiktok: omg first human-nephilim marriage since tartaria
This was relatively common after the Third Reich, the immediate aftermath of any self inflicted disaster. Only caveat is we now have digital footprints, possibly making the pretending harder.
Bigger picture, want to know why they all have such terrible taste in, well, everything.
I get and hold peasant brained ruralites in contempt for being a Trump voters. Felt nostalgic when the dive bar I drank at underage burned down. But Cracker Barrel? Doesn’t not compute.
Housing too.
Paris, obviously. It would be beneath him to live in the decaying coal towns or a place like Marseille. But he gets them, unlike the socialist elitists.
Wish he was work shy like the French stereotype. Also that he’d stay in France because he it’s so great.
Yep.
From a well off family who attended elite schools - tells you incessantly, works full time as a writer in both French and Anglophone wingnut welfare gigs. Mom is a politician with their fascist party.
Somehow he manages to have both modern prejudices and old prejudices too. Remarkable. Sicilians are not Italians or Europeans, they are Arabs or Africans. The view of my elderly grandmother who died in 2013 in her 90s. Only dog shit takes.
PEG, Pascal Emmanuel Gobrey. Reactionary French chauvinist. A man capable of only dog shit takes. Algeria dead ender, somehow, despite being born decades after. IQist, valid for the races only but not ideology. Illustrative example of his takes.
PEG, the man of universally dog shit takes on everything. A few years ago had a surreal back and forth with him about Algeria. Not over interpretation, or anything controversial. But his insistence that it was economically vibrant, despite gov records showing it was a financial black hole.
Worst part is if or when they notice the hospital will close, the economic engine of these places, somehow it will be our fault. So they still can’t vote for us.
Respect that you have the energy for this. You’re right and I’m in agreement but this fantasy that these voters just want “authentic” left wing policies. Just look at the data, speak to them. There is no common ground.
My nightmare, only legislative success is Democrats catnip - more process. Hanging hope on the exit of the party gerontocracy, who are willing to use the levers Trump is using. So far mindset seems to be strongest with Bulwark types, unfortunately.
Experience with activists during the COVID crime surge was really depressing.
Yeah. It’s an immovable object. Really maintain public order, reduce the salience of it in voters minds, and you can space then to implement more humane and rehabilitative policies.
Yes. Seeing the discussion on here about these issues, then seeing voter surveys, or speaking to normie voters. Not even on the same planet. Common view is shoplifters need lengthy prison sentences, and it only gets worse.
I wonder if they act like the local news did in the past. Viewers being far more likely to believe crime is getting worse - always.
This, 100%. There is a reluctant understanding on here that the median voter holds authoritarian views. That means perception of crime, disorder makes them get fascist in a hurry. The more visceral, the more fascist they get. Can’t wish it away either.
It definitely won’t be popular on here or among a lot of the party base. It’s just the public and median voter has a reactionary disposition that is okay with authoritarian methods in general. They apply that to crime, public disorder or any sort. It’s very bleak.
What sort of brain damage is this? Remember that period quite well as a teenager, I’ve heard a lot of take, but this one is new to me. If this person was a right winger I wonder what his take would be?
That’s what his critics point out. Among other things. It would create an environment similar to WWII norms for the army.
Retired military officer and now professor thinks the US military can learn from them. He was pretty adamant, saying the more independent decision making is what we need in peer on peer conflicts that loom on the horizon.
One of my friends is an army veteran, relates to second point, that they use conscription and seem culturally okay with riskier behaviors. American vets on YouTube echo that to varying degrees.
Because there is a shift to the right, occurring internationally, among the present cohort of young people.
Thermostatic reaction began for Democrats in 2021. Likely Republicans will experience similar forces.
Would say it’s a gap! More of a qualifier to current models that have been in use for a while with their limitations known. Economics is changing but its public face is mired in the 1960s. Annoyingly.
Caveat, behavioral finance is an area I didn’t focus on. My focus was on capital markets, corporate finance topics generally.
Stock Market Preferences and Political Leanings: Evidence from Finland - Kaustia & Torstila. Red and Blue Investing: Values and Finance - Hong & Kostovetsky. Those are the foundational, most widely cited that I know from memory. On phone otherwise I’d upload them.
No opinion on JB but visible support by wealthy people, aristocrats in Europe decades ago, does aid in legitimization of left wing economic policy. The electoral base mobilized for it though will definitely look much different than in decades past.
Likely radical is going to be a technocrat, the stake in Intel opens can be French Dirigisme but also a Pandora’s box to implement, say, a rewrite of labor structures without having to pass laws. He unwittingly may have laid the cornerstone for Europeans corporatism here.
True, but worth considering the benefit of maintaining the polite fiction of value neutral. Settled matters with the veneer of permanence now enter the realm of contested claims. Likely over indexing current events but even as a left leaning individual I have reservations!
The court had public and elite legitimacy. The opposite of now, legal elites are muted in defense and it has low public approval, ~10% among Ds. Similar conditions abroad lead to courts losing their power.
Best of luck, hope you do because I’ll definitely read it.
Would be more surprised if it didn’t happen. Leaning towards next administration signals likely non compliance first, escalation to outright defiance. Courts typically lose, notable exception being Nixon during much different era.
Maybe. It’s plausible to have short term fluctuations but things quickly come back to “what’s the alternative”. There isn’t one. Pre WWII there was. We are are locked in with Trump and so are global capital flows.
Yeah, I have my criticisms of economics but this misses the mark.
It’s been done. The limited quality research shows for individuals, “retail”, they show a pattern of different preferences. Most people in markets though work for institutions and they are constrained by their mandates.
The undergrad component is pretty bad. It’s why you see PhD candidates commonly didn’t major in it. The more heterodox stuff ends up usually under “economic history” umbrella. I ended up in finance where it felt far less rigid, others have mentioned feeling similar.
Congrats on pursuing the economics PhD. Very cool, from a guy with just a MS in Finance and briefly, very briefly, considered going on. It’s something you really have to want and I just didn’t.
There are many things governments can do, as a society we can argue if they should. But something it cannot do is make us younger.