|
On September 03 2015 03:28 phantomfive wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2015 00:39 maybenexttime wrote:
Depends on what you mean by "capitalism". You could argue that capitalism indeed lifted people out of poverty, but it certainly wasn't the laissez-faire capitalism that Friedman advocated. That type of capitalism was not practiced neither in the West when it was developing, nor in China after Deng, so I don't see how it validates Friedman's contentions. I don't think you understand what Friedman advocated.
Well, perhaps you can enlighten me then. :-)
On September 03 2015 03:28 phantomfive wrote:Milton Friedman went to China because he was invited by Deng to teach free market principles.
Then he was a lousy teacher because China did not use free market economics during its actual great leap forward.
On September 03 2015 03:28 phantomfive wrote:Another economist, Gary Becker, said of the people of China [and India] that "The person they are most indebted to for the improvement of their situation is Milton Friedman."
Apparently this Gary Becker has little knowledge of China's economic/developmental policy.
|
On September 03 2015 06:07 maybenexttime wrote:
Well, perhaps you can enlighten me then. :-)
I don't think I can. I don't think anyone can. You are the kind person who will never change his mind, no matter how wrong you are.
This is obvious because you are the kind of person who will call Gary Becker ignorant, merely because you disagree with him. He is a Nobel prize winner.
You are not the kind of person who can have a reasonable conversation. That makes me sad, and I hope you change.
|
On September 03 2015 07:24 phantomfive wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2015 06:07 maybenexttime wrote:
Well, perhaps you can enlighten me then. :-) I don't think I can. I don't think anyone can. You are the kind person who will never change his mind, no matter how wrong you are. This is obvious because you are the kind of person who will call Gary Becker ignorant, merely because you disagree with him. He is a Nobel prize winner. You are not the kind of person who can have a reasonable conversation. That makes me sad, and I hope you change.
You are the kind of person who will make crass remarks about someone you don't even know based scant evidence. As a matter of fact, I have never had trouble admitting to being wrong and I have changed my views on many topics, including economics, over the years.
I did not call Gary Becker ignorant. I said that - based on the quote you provided - he knows little of China's economic policy, which largely ignored Milton's neoliberal dogmatism. It's not a matter of disagreeing with him. It's a matter of facts. What Nobel prize did he win? In which field? Because the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is not known for scrutiny. On several occasions the prize was awarded to people who presented diametrically opposite theories/models.
And you can save your patronizing tone and fake care for yourself. :-)
|
On September 03 2015 08:08 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2015 07:24 phantomfive wrote:On September 03 2015 06:07 maybenexttime wrote:
Well, perhaps you can enlighten me then. :-) I don't think I can. I don't think anyone can. You are the kind person who will never change his mind, no matter how wrong you are. This is obvious because you are the kind of person who will call Gary Becker ignorant, merely because you disagree with him. He is a Nobel prize winner. You are not the kind of person who can have a reasonable conversation. That makes me sad, and I hope you change. You are the kind of person who will make crass remarks about someone you don't even know based scant evidence. As a matter of fact, I have never had trouble admitting to being wrong and I have changed my views on many topics, including economics, over the years. I did not call Gary Becker ignorant. I said that - based on the quote you provided - he knows little of China's economic policy, which largely ignored Milton's neoliberal dogmatism. It's not a matter of disagreeing with him. It's a matter of facts. What Nobel prize did he win? In which field? Because the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is not known for scrutiny. On several occasions the prize was awarded to people who presented diametrically opposite theories/models. And you can save your patronizing tone and fake care for yourself. :-)
If you want to disagree with Nobel prize winners, you can. However, you better have good reasons.
Right now all you've said is that Gary Becker is wrong, and if it comes down to what Gary Becker says vs what you say.........9 times out of 10, Gary Becker will be right. Can you explain your reasons for disagreeing with him?
|
England2674 Posts
I think you guys need an economics thread. I don't mind a bit of discussion about the books and their ideas, but lately this thread has been more about faceless names arguing about economics than it has about books.
|
And lucky for them, the Euro politics and economics megathread already exists, where people argue economics ALL THE TIME ad nauseam. So, I agree. Take your economic bickering there.
|
Read, The Futurological Congress, it was quite a fun and interesting read. I really liked the dystopian part, lots of play on words (brilliantly translated in French I must say), slow revelations that are not surprising but really underline different aspect of the stuff... The rest was in Lem's amusing vein, not his best but not his worst either.
Also read Hyperion, a bit disappointed, but a clear proof that bookwyrm was right about germans wanting to be greek.
+ Show Spoiler +Yes I'm aware this might be confusing, but I think it's funny this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Keats'.
I don't think people would talk as much as they do about Shakespeare, Milton and Chaucer if he and/or Shelley lived to be sixty.
Edit: not because Keats and Shelley would surpass those poets, but because they would be among them.
|
Baa?21247 Posts
Keats already is among them lol.
|
In any case I have enjoyed too little poetry in foreign languages for it to make much of a difference 
|
On September 08 2015 03:46 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
Keats already is among them lol.
Is he? I always had the impression that Shakespeare, Milton and Chaucer towered above other English language writers.
|
Read Limping Fate by the Strugastky brothers. Really really recommended. No idea if it has been translated in english though. Also samizdat :p
|
About Face 3 by Alan Cooper
its about user interface design.
|
Halfway through this book now, I'm liking it so far
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51E%2B7V-PDyL.jpg)
|
Almost finished the first book in the Powder Mage series titled Promise of Blood. For those that don't know it: the story starts with one of the protagonists performing a coupe in his country, and putting the entire royal family and all the noble families to the guillotine a la the french revolution. The rest of the story is a mix of mystery, betrayal, war, and prophecy. Nothing brilliant but a fun read with a (at least for me) fresh setting.
|
I am currently reading History of Metallurgy by R.F. Tylcote (2ed) and i was wondering if You could recommend to me books on (1) history of technology (2) History of mining and/or industry. I am mainly intrested in timeframe between antic and XX century (but up to industrial revolution is still fine). Its fine if the book also discusses impact of those processes on society but i would like to avoid thesis driven books (like Guns, Germs and Steel for example).
|
England2674 Posts
I started Dune. Will let you know where I fall when done.
|
On September 15 2015 12:48 B.I.G. wrote:
Almost finished the first book in the Powder Mage series titled Promise of Blood. For those that don't know it: the story starts with one of the protagonists performing a coupe in his country, and putting the entire royal family and all the noble families to the guillotine a la the french revolution. The rest of the story is a mix of mystery, betrayal, war, and prophecy. Nothing brilliant but a fun read with a (at least for me) fresh setting.
If you read the Hunger Games, it's kinda like that series. Good premise, adequate writing, worse sequels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
