5 ms·

I often wonder why more engineers don't get into economics. It is a control system and would be well suited to engineering graduates with expertise in control s

I often wonder why more engineers don't get into economics. It is a control system and would be well suited to engineering graduates with expertise in control systems.

bjnortier_hn 16y ago
I've wondered if it would be beneficial to apply some control systems theory to financial systems. But I'm not convinced that it would be applicable since control systems are designed for systems that follow the laws of physics. Financial systems include emotional responses and irrationality, how would control systems cope with that? P.S. I find it interesting that the majority of Chinese presidents from 1993 to 2010 have an engineering background.
roel_v 16y ago
Sweet mother of jesus no. Engineers would gravitate towards a centrally controlled system in no time. Economics is not a control system, it's emerging behavior from independently acting agents (free market economics is, which I argue is the only morally defensible system). A UK (?) technology-oriented scientist build a computer-controlled economic system for some South-American country in the 1970's, complete with a Star Trek like control room. There was a revolution before it could be put to proper use though. I don't remember enough details to google it, anyone else who can dig up some links?
- bd 16y ago
  Project Cybersyn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn Discussed here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1190508 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1190508
  - roel_v 16y ago
    Thank you, that's the one.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- paulnelligan 16y ago
  The fact that one experiment went wrong does not a bad theory make... there are many variables to be accounted for in a complex system such as this. I respectfully, but completely disagree with you on the fact that free market economics is morally defensible, there isn't really any conscience behind it, just an overriding aim (i.e. profit) ... as for independently acting agents, I assume you mean various corporations, financial institutions, and government bodies... Again, I disagree, they all have a degree of interdependence and are centrally bound by regulations, and central banks, which exist whether we like it or not ... As a disclaimer, I consider myself a liberal centrist with both libertarian and social democratic leanings.
  - roel_v 16y ago
    Free market economics is the only defensible system on the grounds that any other system will necessarily infringe on individual freedoms. A free market in itself is morally neutral, what I meant is that a free market is the only system that does not rely on forcing individuals to act 'for the greater good'; sacrificing free people to the ideals, beliefs or whims of others is what I consider immoral. Agents in a free market system act independently, pursuing their own benefit; be it corporations or individual consumers. Yes they interact in the sense that it takes two (or more) parties to trade or make contracts, what I mean is that they act for themselves and not coordinate on a mass scale to make the resulting system in a certain direction. Agents exhibit behavior that consists of simple profit-seeking rules, which in turn generates a system dynamic on the macro scale. Their independence lies in their freedom to behave in their own self-interest, in contrast with a centrally planned economy where individuals are told to do or produce as is deemed fit by the central command.
SkyMarshal 16y ago
Doesn't control system theory require some level of predictability in the system, plus a system that does not adapt to the controls placed on it?
- bjnortier_hn 16y ago
  "Adaptive control involves modifying the control law used by a controller to cope with the fact that the parameters of the system being controlled are slowly time-varying or uncertain" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_control

I often wonder why more engineers don't get into economics. It is a control system and would be well suited to engineering graduates with expertise in control systems.

bjnortier_hn 16y ago

I've wondered if it would be beneficial to apply some control systems theory to financial systems. But I'm not convinced that it would be applicable since control systems are designed for systems that follow the laws of physics. Financial systems include emotional responses and irrationality, how would control systems cope with that? P.S. I find it interesting that the majority of Chinese presidents from 1993 to 2010 have an engineering background.

roel_v 16y ago

Sweet mother of jesus no. Engineers would gravitate towards a centrally controlled system in no time. Economics is not a control system, it's emerging behavior from independently acting agents (free market economics is, which I argue is the only morally defensible system). A UK (?) technology-oriented scientist build a computer-controlled economic system for some South-American country in the 1970's, complete with a Star Trek like control room. There was a revolution before it could be put to proper use though. I don't remember enough details to google it, anyone else who can dig up some links?

bd 16y ago
Project Cybersyn: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn Discussed here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1190508 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1190508
- roel_v 16y ago
  Thank you, that's the one.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
paulnelligan 16y ago
The fact that one experiment went wrong does not a bad theory make... there are many variables to be accounted for in a complex system such as this. I respectfully, but completely disagree with you on the fact that free market economics is morally defensible, there isn't really any conscience behind it, just an overriding aim (i.e. profit) ... as for independently acting agents, I assume you mean various corporations, financial institutions, and government bodies... Again, I disagree, they all have a degree of interdependence and are centrally bound by regulations, and central banks, which exist whether we like it or not ... As a disclaimer, I consider myself a liberal centrist with both libertarian and social democratic leanings.
- roel_v 16y ago
  Free market economics is the only defensible system on the grounds that any other system will necessarily infringe on individual freedoms. A free market in itself is morally neutral, what I meant is that a free market is the only system that does not rely on forcing individuals to act 'for the greater good'; sacrificing free people to the ideals, beliefs or whims of others is what I consider immoral. Agents in a free market system act independently, pursuing their own benefit; be it corporations or individual consumers. Yes they interact in the sense that it takes two (or more) parties to trade or make contracts, what I mean is that they act for themselves and not coordinate on a mass scale to make the resulting system in a certain direction. Agents exhibit behavior that consists of simple profit-seeking rules, which in turn generates a system dynamic on the macro scale. Their independence lies in their freedom to behave in their own self-interest, in contrast with a centrally planned economy where individuals are told to do or produce as is deemed fit by the central command.

SkyMarshal 16y ago

Doesn't control system theory require some level of predictability in the system, plus a system that does not adapt to the controls placed on it?

bjnortier_hn 16y ago
"Adaptive control involves modifying the control law used by a controller to cope with the fact that the parameters of the system being controlled are slowly time-varying or uncertain" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_control