Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Being sniffed out and attacked

athena1's picture

http://atheismplus.com/forums/viewtopic....

Any and all help is welcome.
I *think* I understand macro well enough. But if I start to fail. give me a hand.

"He who designs and controls the nukes rules the world," is my DIY philosophy.

0
No votes yet

Comments

kewball's picture
Submitted by kewball on

I lack the attention span to comprehend that conversation.

I'd be wary of too-readily adopting the terminology of capitalism/the establishment/whatever collective noun you prefer. "macro" reeks too much of accepting a misleading, at best, understanding of How Things Actually Work.

neweconomicperspectives.org is worth visiting for an alternative glossary. Names I'll drop: Stephanie Kelton, Bill Black, Ann Pettifor, David Harvey.

athena1's picture
Submitted by athena1 on

And I think he can be reasonable here.
And I think I might understand macroeconomics JUST enough to argue in econo-speak while also telling the truth.

Submitted by YesMaybe on

Who Are These Economists, Anyway? by James K. Galbraith
http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/HE/TA09Ec...

I also agree with kewball that to think/argue within the neoclassical straitjacket--which is what Krugman does--is a mistake in the first place. If you're interested in some readings, I'd suggest Thorstein Veblen (esp. Absentee Ownership) and the original J.K. Galbraith (esp. The Affluent Society and The Great Crash, 1929), as well as Marxist economists such as David Harvey (mentioned by kewball) or John Bellamy Foster.

I also won't be joining arguments, but I do think trying to get Krugman on your side (or getting yourself on his side?) is a mistake.

Clarification: when I say 'neoclassical', I mean the 'neoclassical synthesis', so I'm including folks such as Krugman.

athena1's picture
Submitted by athena1 on

And I think I'm winning!

Our basic morality is where it's at. We are transparent activist ninjas. And our ideas are kickass compared to the enemy.