6 ms·

article is pure trash, anyone with some background in basic economics knows what creates inflation.

by tmaly 3y ago

ignatiusj 3y ago
>article is pure trash Hardly surprising when it's from a smug rag like the New Yorker. Those writers/editors live in a bubble.
stefncb 3y ago
Please explain yourself then. This kind of criticism is very unproductive and demoralizing to people who put hard work into making something. I'm not for or against either side, but I was put off by your comment.
- tmaly 3y ago
  Creating 5 trillion in new money?
truculent 3y ago
I would be pretty shocked if Weber, an economist, didn’t have a background in basic economics
- zeroonetwothree 3y ago
  Spouting mainstream views doesn’t get you New Yorker articles
blululu 3y ago
Inflation is much more complicated than the basics they teach you in the first two years of university Econ. We have a set of broad stroke theories that apply on a macro level in various circumstances. These theories often contradict one another and it is not always clear which one should be the dominant force at any given time. At a fundamental level out understanding of this is imperfect at best and at a practical level it is pretty obvious that central bankers do not have a complete grasp of the central concept that they devote their lives trying to control.
- johntiger1 3y ago
  Could you explain more about which specific theories contradict one another?
  - mitthrowaway2 3y ago
    I'll offer one example: Neo-Fisherism and New Keynesianism directly contradict in their assessment of the impact of interest rates on inflation. https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/november/neo-fisherism-unconventional-monetary-policy https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/november/neo-... It appears that the relationship between interest rates and inflation is still an open question in economics, which is kind of fascinating, because it's like trying to drive a moving car when the relationship between the speedometer and the brake pedal is still being debated by experts. There are similar debates when it comes to employment. Is a high level of employment inflationary? The established wisdom of the Phillips curve is that it is, because low unemployment leads to high labour bargaining power which leads to wages rising faster than productivity, which results in inflation. But there are many economists wondering if it's not the other way around, because people are employed to produce in-demand goods, while unemployed people don't produce goods but still need to eat. These unresolved questions create questions around the inflationary impacts of eg. a jobs guarantee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_guarantee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_guarantee) relative to a universal basic income (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income) have some economists arguing for and others against. There is no widespread consensus about the outcomes of such policies.
    - rightbyte 3y ago
      > It appears that the relationship between interest rates and inflation is still an open question in economics Thanks. I have never understood why a zero sum interest would lower inflation. Or why fewer employed poatoe farmers would make potaties cheaper. And people talk about it like it was obvious but can never explain.
shove 3y ago
You’ll be posting a relevant resume then?
OGWhales 3y ago
I find that people who fling around the term “basic economics” rarely have a good understanding of economics, usually basing their opinion on overly simplistic ideas that don’t reflect reality. Many of the things mentioned in the article, specifically causes of inflation, are talked about by other economists. This tells me your idea that “anyone with some background in basic economics” are all in agreement (with you) is wrong. Feel free to share a proper criticism, there is a decent amount you could discuss from the causes of inflation to her potential solutions. That would make for a more interesting discussion than hand-waving the entire article as “pure trash”, which I don't think is a fair description of the article even if you disagree with Weber.

article is pure trash, anyone with some background in basic economics knows what creates inflation.

by tmaly 3y ago

article is pure trash, anyone with some background in basic economics knows what creates inflation.

>article is pure trash Hardly surprising when it's from a smug rag like the New Yorker. Those writers/editors live in a bubble.

stefncb 3y ago

Please explain yourself then. This kind of criticism is very unproductive and demoralizing to people who put hard work into making something. I'm not for or against either side, but I was put off by your comment.

tmaly 3y ago
Creating 5 trillion in new money?

truculent 3y ago

I would be pretty shocked if Weber, an economist, didn’t have a background in basic economics

zeroonetwothree 3y ago
Spouting mainstream views doesn’t get you New Yorker articles

blululu 3y ago

Inflation is much more complicated than the basics they teach you in the first two years of university Econ. We have a set of broad stroke theories that apply on a macro level in various circumstances. These theories often contradict one another and it is not always clear which one should be the dominant force at any given time. At a fundamental level out understanding of this is imperfect at best and at a practical level it is pretty obvious that central bankers do not have a complete grasp of the central concept that they devote their lives trying to control.

johntiger1 3y ago
Could you explain more about which specific theories contradict one another?
- mitthrowaway2 3y ago
  I'll offer one example: Neo-Fisherism and New Keynesianism directly contradict in their assessment of the impact of interest rates on inflation. https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/november/neo-fisherism-unconventional-monetary-policy https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2016/november/neo-... It appears that the relationship between interest rates and inflation is still an open question in economics, which is kind of fascinating, because it's like trying to drive a moving car when the relationship between the speedometer and the brake pedal is still being debated by experts. There are similar debates when it comes to employment. Is a high level of employment inflationary? The established wisdom of the Phillips curve is that it is, because low unemployment leads to high labour bargaining power which leads to wages rising faster than productivity, which results in inflation. But there are many economists wondering if it's not the other way around, because people are employed to produce in-demand goods, while unemployed people don't produce goods but still need to eat. These unresolved questions create questions around the inflationary impacts of eg. a jobs guarantee (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_guarantee https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_guarantee) relative to a universal basic income (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_basic_income) have some economists arguing for and others against. There is no widespread consensus about the outcomes of such policies.
  - rightbyte 3y ago
    > It appears that the relationship between interest rates and inflation is still an open question in economics Thanks. I have never understood why a zero sum interest would lower inflation. Or why fewer employed poatoe farmers would make potaties cheaper. And people talk about it like it was obvious but can never explain.

shove 3y ago

You’ll be posting a relevant resume then?

OGWhales 3y ago

I find that people who fling around the term “basic economics” rarely have a good understanding of economics, usually basing their opinion on overly simplistic ideas that don’t reflect reality. Many of the things mentioned in the article, specifically causes of inflation, are talked about by other economists. This tells me your idea that “anyone with some background in basic economics” are all in agreement (with you) is wrong. Feel free to share a proper criticism, there is a decent amount you could discuss from the causes of inflation to her potential solutions. That would make for a more interesting discussion than hand-waving the entire article as “pure trash”, which I don't think is a fair description of the article even if you disagree with Weber.