5 ms·

Brexit is a little over-focused on at this point. As far as the article, the beginning half was pretty good, relatively straight forward and even if you disagr

by apalmer 10y ago

Brexit is a little over-focused on at this point. As far as the article, the beginning half was pretty good, relatively straight forward and even if you disagree with the conclusions the thought process behind them is well laid out and reasonable. the second half, which is everything after 'TECH AND A NEW SYSTEM' is just ideology, without much foundation in empiricism... again whether you agree or disagree, its just not coming from a place of reasonable logical conclusion built on basic empirical data. ...

1337biz 10y ago
" is just ideology, without much foundation in empiricism" That's pretty much how politics work nowadays...
- Bromskloss 10y ago
  I think that most political issues (as well as personal ones) are matters of opinion anyway, not lending themselves well to mathematical quantification.
  - bduerst 10y ago
    That doesn't mean the facts and predictions from economic experts should have been ignored in this vote. This was an issue with some pretty clear ramifications.
    - botfly 10y ago
      Well really the opinions of economists on this DID have real, quantifiable backing. It's not just ideological conjecture when economists assert that backing out of a trade union will have negative consequences.
    - Bromskloss 10y ago
      I was talking about politics in general. In this particular case, some economic aspects might be matters of fact to which one can apply forecasting techniques, whereas other aspects (e.g. whether one does or does not accept that power over one's country is given to the EU, and whether one wishes to strive towards or away from being one country with the other European Union countries) are more matters of opinion.
      - bduerst 10y ago
        Of course - It just seems weird to say that when leaving the E.U. isn't just a matter of opinion. There are certainly some political issues that are only a matter of opinion, but this issue was much, much more. If anything, it shows that the leave voters in the U.K. are not very interested in facts and forecasts made by experts.
        Bromskloss 10y ago
        > If anything, it shows that the leave voters in the U.K. are not very interested in facts and forecasts made by experts. What you describe is at least one possibility. Another one is that the voters consider other aspects more important.
        bduerst 10y ago
        >Another one is that the voters consider other aspects more important. Which is the same as saying they are not very interested in the facts and forecasts made by experts. The majority of the leave voters are undeducated, older, and xenophobic. [1] The misinformation spread by the leave campaigners fed into their fears about immigration, which lead them to ignore facts. [2] [3] [1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis?CMP=twt_b-gdndata http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/... [2] https://www.rt.com/uk/346342-brexit-voters-ignorance-misinformation/ https://www.rt.com/uk/346342-brexit-voters-ignorance-misinfo... [3] https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharch...
        Bromskloss 10y ago
        > Which is the same as saying they are not very interested in the facts and forecasts made by experts. I don't see how that would be the same thing. What I'm saying is that even if you trust a certain forecast that says that X will happen if you vote A and Y will happen if you vote B, and even if you consider X to be more beneficial than Y, you might still choose to vote B because you find it better in other respects. By the way, I'm not sure linking to Russia Today adds much. I'd be wary of trusting their angle on things. It's all good, though, since you included the original link.
- botfly 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure it's always been like that but presently I lack the data prove it
Bartweiss 10y ago
Ironically, I found the second half much better than the average "new economics" thinkpiece. It's wholly nonempircal, to be sure, and it seems to ignore current trends in regulation and corporate behavior. But it does manage to put together an internally-consistent vision for the future, which is surprisingly rare. That alone puts it head and shoulder above the common calls for UBI, or deregulation, or a gig economy which fail to even consider the framework required for such a change.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by apalmer 10y ago

1337biz 10y ago

" is just ideology, without much foundation in empiricism" That's pretty much how politics work nowadays...

Bromskloss 10y ago
I think that most political issues (as well as personal ones) are matters of opinion anyway, not lending themselves well to mathematical quantification.
- bduerst 10y ago
  That doesn't mean the facts and predictions from economic experts should have been ignored in this vote. This was an issue with some pretty clear ramifications.
  - botfly 10y ago
    Well really the opinions of economists on this DID have real, quantifiable backing. It's not just ideological conjecture when economists assert that backing out of a trade union will have negative consequences.
  - Bromskloss 10y ago
    I was talking about politics in general. In this particular case, some economic aspects might be matters of fact to which one can apply forecasting techniques, whereas other aspects (e.g. whether one does or does not accept that power over one's country is given to the EU, and whether one wishes to strive towards or away from being one country with the other European Union countries) are more matters of opinion.
    - bduerst 10y ago
      Of course - It just seems weird to say that when leaving the E.U. isn't just a matter of opinion. There are certainly some political issues that are only a matter of opinion, but this issue was much, much more. If anything, it shows that the leave voters in the U.K. are not very interested in facts and forecasts made by experts.
      - Bromskloss 10y ago
        > If anything, it shows that the leave voters in the U.K. are not very interested in facts and forecasts made by experts. What you describe is at least one possibility. Another one is that the voters consider other aspects more important.
        bduerst 10y ago
        >Another one is that the voters consider other aspects more important. Which is the same as saying they are not very interested in the facts and forecasts made by experts. The majority of the leave voters are undeducated, older, and xenophobic. [1] The misinformation spread by the leave campaigners fed into their fears about immigration, which lead them to ignore facts. [2] [3] [1] http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis?CMP=twt_b-gdndata http://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/... [2] https://www.rt.com/uk/346342-brexit-voters-ignorance-misinformation/ https://www.rt.com/uk/346342-brexit-voters-ignorance-misinfo... [3] https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3742/The-Perils-of-Perception-and-the-EU.aspx https://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharch...
        Bromskloss 10y ago
        > Which is the same as saying they are not very interested in the facts and forecasts made by experts. I don't see how that would be the same thing. What I'm saying is that even if you trust a certain forecast that says that X will happen if you vote A and Y will happen if you vote B, and even if you consider X to be more beneficial than Y, you might still choose to vote B because you find it better in other respects. By the way, I'm not sure linking to Russia Today adds much. I'd be wary of trusting their angle on things. It's all good, though, since you included the original link.
botfly 10y ago
I'm pretty sure it's always been like that but presently I lack the data prove it

Bartweiss 10y ago

Ironically, I found the second half much better than the average "new economics" thinkpiece. It's wholly nonempircal, to be sure, and it seems to ignore current trends in regulation and corporate behavior. But it does manage to put together an internally-consistent vision for the future, which is surprisingly rare. That alone puts it head and shoulder above the common calls for UBI, or deregulation, or a gig economy which fail to even consider the framework required for such a change.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]