Steemit Libertarians: Is this caller right about libertarian economists?
The caller says, in a less than articulate way, that the most accurate and trustworthy economic analysts are....libertarians. I disagree, not so much particularly about libertarians, but I don't believe ANY economists really know what's going to happen.
What do you think? Let me know in a reply!
▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
If you have any doubts go watch Ron Paul on the floor of the House laying out the complete 2008 financial crisis in 2001. Where do you think he got the information? Economics is part science and part statistical analysis but it’s also part common sense and understanding human behavior in markets. I work in finance, I am a libertarian/voluntarist, and we are right on these issues and the track record of history has completely proved this.
I'm not sure honestly. I do think that generally, people who research more and have more of an open mind are less likely to associate themselves directly with the left or the right. Those who are associated with a single party and won't budge have little incentive to seek out unbiased information.
I have to agree on that, extremes rarely make good predictions neither do they tend to be very futureproof.
As @michaelluchies pointed out, I believe that researchers which do not tend strongly into any directions probably provide the most honest insights.
Nevertheless, even if those might get closer and more accurate analysis since they're under a lighter bias, I don't believe that anyone gets any close and that everyone who has been right with their economic analysis until now, just had a lot of luck.
If you want to see libertarian ideology crumble , google @Samseder libertarian debate.
My take on the whole thing is :
Libertarian marketing to recruit is all about freedom , liberty and individual rights but when the rubber meets the road it ends up being the privileged ( $$wise) wanting to preserve their gains by removing any rules that may still remain as control for the system.
Imagine this : would you want to participate in a sport where there is no referee ?? ofcourse a biased referee is bad but the answer is probably not absence of the same.
And that is my problem with Libertarian Ideas.
It sound to me just like Communism Ideas.
On theory, everything would perfect, and everyone would be happy.
But when you put human egotistic emotions and desires, everything falls apart.
Most libertarians are not utopians. So no one claims everyone would be happy. Especially since all have different notions of happy.
Human egotistic emotions makes government fall apart even more. The notion that big government somehow keepa this i check is ridiculous and against everything you see in history.
The market is the best way to channel these emotions to productive gains. Because you need to i order to profit. If you can just tax well no need to be efficient
IMO- irrespective of big or small , a government which works for people is the need of hour.
Markets don't exist in isolation either , they are heavily influenced by externalities , its only free within certain bounds , don't you think ?
government which works for people - this is mostly empty words. what does work for people mean?
while market can have externalities and bounds there are ways around this in a mostly market economy. Now libertarians are of varying oppinion on this. Mostly will tell you about Coase. I can accept some laws for externalities that can be significantly damaging, as long as this is clearly proven. Although I am more on the punishment for damage when damages caused to others are evident than excesive so called preventive regulation for most things.
I looked at that guy steemit blog and it is just a bunch of lefty talking points. No insight to be found
@ionescur , here is an example of debate with a Former Libertarian Presidential Candidate
the libertarian in this is awful. Has no idea how to persuasively argue his points. And yells like a moron then again no self respecting libertarian would be caught dead in the Libertarian Party. I don't see how this makes libertarian ideology crumble.
@ionescur -
1.interesting comment , " no self respecting libertarian would be caught dead in the Libertarian Party" - why is that ? please expand on this .
2.Who do you think is a good representative of Libertarian ideology ?
Libertarian Party -it is rather full of people who are not that much libertarian but are trying to get publicity.
Besides me you mean? I don't think there is one representative of libertarian ideology if you want a YouTube link or something like that. It is a fairly dispersed ideology, more so than others due to not being that mainstream and people arriving to it on their own. I do not think there is a good representative of left wing ideology either. That is why I would not give a link saying see left ideology crumble like you did. Because if a left wing person looses a debate that does not mean left ideology crumbles. Sadly I feel the kind of people mostly attracted to libertarianism are the kind who do not know how to "market" the ideology. They often preach to the coir and as if their conclusions are evident to others.
To give names, on economics Cafe Hayek is a good resource, for example.
As a short example of bad arguing, the guy above jumps right to some "right to secede" when asked about right not respected in the US by government. There are many other things one can mention before the so called right to secede which is not something most libertarians would consider.
@ionescur - if it was just one libertarian debating badly I would not have classified it as crumbling of the ideology. There is plethora of these debates ranging from libertarian presidential candidates to libertarian professors and what not.
If it's not documented in a formal manner how do you ascertain what an ideology constitutes of ? I would look at the prominent leaders/representatives of the same.As far as representatives of left wing ideology is concerned , I find the below as an reasonable mapping:
Neoliberal : Hillary and Democratic establishment ( Biden/cory booker/kamala harris etc) on the media side : MSNBC , CNN and other main streamers
Progressive : Bernie Sanders , Elizabeth warren , etc on the media side : David Pakman , Kyle Kulinski , Sam Seder , Cenk Uygur
Unless you are talking ancapa libertarianiam does not mean no referee and no rules so that is a strawman.
And the priviliged are rarely libertarian. They want big government to protect their privilege. They can control govnment. The market not so kuch. Thinking government protect mostly the weak from the strong is delusion
@davidpakman - what say you?
Most libertarian econimists do not really claim they can know what happens. That is kind of the point of free markets. You cannot know understand or plan the economy but there are sone inherent feedback in it which while flawed work better than planning.
Come on now, we all know that, only librarians can fix the ecomoney!
as long as they are slutty librarians
Nice post I very like it..
What an economist can boast of Is to predict what is going to happen...and that does not mean it must happen...sometimes it wouldn't happen..yeah....nice post
I think i disagree that fact too
libertarians can't be the trustworthy economic analyst
A good economist, regardless of what others label their political leaning, is more of a historian. Any that say they can predict the future are full of it.
First, there is all kinds of economists from every political view that exist.
The point people don't understand is that is not about economists know or don't know what will happen.
The main tool an economist use is the analysis of data and translating it to statistics. If done the right way, these statistics show the probability of a certain event to happen.
But the problem with statistics is that the data may be manipulated to reach a specific results.
In that way, most of the Economist report/predictions is biased by the Economist personal views (political or economic), so to actually analyse and understand what an economist is saying, you need to understand were that economist stand on political and economic matters.
In the end, Economist opinions is a bet based on the probability/accuracy of the data they chose to use to analyze the problem.