decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
Travesty | 68 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
Travesty
Authored by: stegu on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 04:22 AM EDT
Modern economic theory of almost any kind is a travesty, I'd say. That is an
extreme, bitter and cynical standpoint, I know, but I have seen enough of bad
so-called "predictions" from "models" that are no more than
guesswork or weak and improperly conducted correlation studies to make it my
firmly held opinion that economics, as it is defined and applied today, is
fatally flawed and is very likely to go down in flames unless it is
fundamentally reformed.

Making a system introspectively and strongly dependent on its own self-induced
oscillations is an open invitation to chaos. Economists try to apply systems
theory to human behavior (which is what economics is fundamentally about), but
at the same time they try to ignore the most basic rules of stability, or even
claim that they somehow don't apply. I am at the sidelines, watching helplessly
as they paint the world into a corner while claiming that the walls we are
pressed up against are not really there, or they will magically disappear soon,
don't you worry.

(A bleak outlook, sorry, but this has been nagging me for some time.)

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • Travesty - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 05:38 AM EDT
    • Travesty - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 07:23 AM EDT
      • Travesty - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 11:36 AM EDT
    • Travesty - Authored by: ThrPilgrim on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 07:53 AM EDT
    • Economists - Authored by: Imaginos1892 on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 04:07 PM EDT
      • Economists - Authored by: PJ on Saturday, June 16 2012 @ 01:12 PM EDT
  • Travesty - Authored by: Wol on Friday, June 15 2012 @ 07:28 AM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )