[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Iaato', 'O')ne question for you, Bill. How on earth do you describe complex system function with this tool?

[Iaato]

Tyler, life is a complex, three-dimensional derivative consisting of producers and consumers spread out in all directions and at an infinite number of scales vertically, reacting and responding to inputs to their system and producing outputs that affect other systems. This creates a dynamic living respirating world that changes over time. NCE can't explain that world using two axes, two dimensions, and the failure to include derivations over time.

Neoclassical economics is based on discredited 19th century physics and primitive algebraic math. But in the meantime, it has become the mouthpiece, explanatory, and apologist for modern capitalism and fractional reserve banking. It will go down with the ship.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Iaato', 'T')yler, life is a complex, three-dimensional derivative consisting of producers and consumers spread out in all directions and at an infinite number of scales vertically, reacting and responding to inputs to their system and producing outputs that affect other systems. This creates a dynamic living respirating world that changes over time. NCE can't explain that world using two axes, two dimensions, and the failure to include derivations over time.

Neoclassical economics is based on discredited 19th century physics and primitive algebraic math. But in the meantime, it has become the mouthpiece, explanatory, and apologist for modern capitalism and fractional reserve banking. It will go down with the ship.

[hornofhubris]

The markets and economist models work fine if you account
for the growth in concentrated wealth and consumption by
the reduction in human beings on the planet in response
to resource limitations. We have sort of done this to date
by having a small subset of the humans in the financial game
in any real way, and the rest subsisting in undeveloped areas
almost directly from local natural resources.

We are coming up on the point where resource limits force
the economist models to continue by trading humans for
growth, which if done on purpose or via default is fairly
untenable morally. It does not make economics wrong
or immoral, it just means that it can encounter a set of
circumstances that is beyond the ability of free markets
and growth based systems to contend with.

That math model presented here reminds me of the
SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threat)
analysis system. Which is similar to the four directions
analysis of native peoples, etc. etc. I am unable to take
this observation any further myself and yield to Golem
to run with it instead.

[KingDavid]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('BigTex', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Iaato', 'T')yler, life is a complex, three-dimensional derivative consisting of producers and consumers spread out in all directions and at an infinite number of scales vertically, reacting and responding to inputs to their system and producing outputs that affect other systems. This creates a dynamic living respirating world that changes over time. NCE can't explain that world using two axes, two dimensions, and the failure to include derivations over time.

Neoclassical economics is based on discredited 19th century physics and primitive algebraic math. But in the meantime, it has become the mouthpiece, explanatory, and apologist for modern capitalism and fractional reserve banking. It will go down with the ship.

[Tyler_JC]

Iaato, they aren't trying to model the entire global economy on one chart.

Secondly, prices account for the effect of consumption/production on other systems. Greater investment in corn ethanol production has shifted prices upward for corn. The price of other grains has increased in tandem because land is being diverted from wheat to corn. All of this can be explained using a Supply/Demand curve.

The failure of neoclassical economics was the failure to include the cost on the natural ecosystems of economic activity. Carbon taxes, pollution caps, CFC bans, trash fees, and the rest help to rectify that problem. There is more work to be done but it doesn't mean that the entire system is useless.

Which economist got a Nobel Prize undeservedly? I'm not sure what you're getting at exactly.

[keehah]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')obel Laureate Friedman: Excuse me, it's not limited from an economic point of view. You have to separate the economic from the physical point of view.

[Twilight]

Why this belief that economics and overshoot are somehow incompatible, or that the latter represents a failure of the former?

Ultimately economics is only a means of describing the process of bargaining and exchange, and this is a behaviour that is pretty much part of our genetic inheritance. It has been with us since we came down from the trees and it will be with us when we have turned our urban centres into quarries. The mental tools we would use for analysing such interaction would vary little between epochs, and have not even varied that much between ideologies.

Don't fall into the trap of believing economics promises an outcome, it does not. It just lets you think a little bit about how things happened. If there was failure, it was very human.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Twilight', 'W')hy this belief that economics and overshoot are somehow incompatible, or that the latter represents a failure of the former?

Ultimately economics is only a means of describing the process of bargaining and exchange, and this is a behaviour that is pretty much part of our genetic inheritance. It has been with us since we came down from the trees and it will be with us when we have turned our urban centres into quarries. The mental tools we would use for analysing such interaction would vary little between epochs, and have not even varied that much between ideologies.

Don't fall into the trap of believing economics promises an outcome, it does not. It just lets you think a little bit about how things happened. If there was failure, it was very human.

[threadbear]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Iaato', '
')
Neoclassical economics is based on discredited 19th century physics and primitive algebraic math. But in the meantime, it has become the mouthpiece, explanatory, and apologist for modern capitalism and fractional reserve banking. It will go down with the ship.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', ' ')How the environment became an externality, I'll never know.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('threadbear', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Iaato', '
')
Neoclassical economics is based on discredited 19th century physics and primitive algebraic math. But in the meantime, it has become the mouthpiece, explanatory, and apologist for modern capitalism and fractional reserve banking. It will go down with the ship.

[seldom_seen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'I') think it is very much part and parcel of the idea of Mankind as a product of special creation. In spite of science, and scientific points of view, many people, even most perhaps, see humans as not part of the natural order, not subject to the same restraints and laws. Seeing ourselves as separate or above Nature could easily lead to economic theories which are separate from Nature and her limits.

[Tyler_JC]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n economics, an externality is an impact (positive or negative) on any party not involved in a given economic transaction.

[mmasters]

Economics is mixture of science, art and bullshit.

[BigTex]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n economics, an externality is an impact (positive or negative) on any party not involved in a given economic transaction.

[Iaato]

Tyler, the name alone indicates how important the environment is to economists. Economists are entirely a product of the forever-growth mentality, in which there are always an abundant amount of sources and sinks. Using paper credits to ameliorate environmental damage is genius. Who thought of that one? That'll fix us all right up, I'm sure.

I suffered through some bullshit economic courses at GMU getting my PhD. GMU turns out to be a hive of Libertarian thought. I spent the entire time arguing with the professor about the tragedy of the commons and other glaring holes in his arguments, and had to read WAAAYYY too much Hayek. Economics is about wishful thinking. It works on a micro scale when you're talking about invisible hands exchanging goods, and that's about it.

Economists would do better for some required logic courses in their courses of undergraduate study.

[seldom_seen]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'H')ave you guys ever even taken an economics class?

[big_rc]

There is a reason that every economics department in the US university system is in the social sciences / "soft science". What people have forgotten is that a social science by its very definition is not a precise study of things because it studies human behavior and humans can be weird, irrational creatures at times. People have elevated economics to some kind of quasi-gospel on par with more rigorous scientific studies such as chemistry or biology. That's not to say economics is necessarily a bad thing but methinks people put too much faith in this study and not enough in the underlying assumptions. That is why this article is brillant.

[Tyler_JC]

I'll try again.

An externality is an effect that is not readily apparent to the two people involved in a transaction.

If I spend $1,000 on paint in order to make my house more attractive I am essentially saying that improving the attractiveness of my house is worth at least $1,000. This can be reflected either in my happiness (utility) or in the improved value of my property.

If I am unwilling to spend $1,000 that means that I don't think that improving my house is worth it.

But my decision process is flawed when it comes to social welfare because I am not considering how my actions will affect my neighbors.

They want me to paint my house because it will increase the value of their property as well as mine. Moreover, it will give them something pretty to look at.

This externality isn't considered when the consumer (me) makes his choice. I don't care about my neighbors or their property values. However, if my neighbors paid me a couple hundred dollars to defray the cost of the paint, I would gladly paint my house.

The neighbors should be willing to give up a portion of their surplus (higher property values) in order to maximize their own happiness, no?

To simplify it further.

Let's say I'm a hard core doomer who doesn't care about recycling because it's "too late to fix anything".

If you pay me 2 cents per recycled plastic bottle, I'll recycle maybe a handful of them.

If you pay me 20 cents per bottle...I might recycle 50% of them.

If you pay me $2 per bottle, I'll recycle nearly all of them.

The graph of that data is my supply curve. Price incentives will change my behavior and make me supply more recycled bottles.

Society is willing to pay me to recycle because they gain something from reduced resource consumption.

The environment is an externality because I don't care about it and it is unable to influence my decision (in this example). But the environment, like my neighbors, can pay me to make the societally responsible decision.

Or more accurately, the government, acting on behalf of the environment, can get me to change my behavior.