4 ms·
That series of posts was mostly about miscommunication, we were talking about two different things (compiling the same code using different compilers and compil
by InclinedPlane 13y ago
That series of posts was mostly about miscommunication, we were talking about two different things (compiling the same code using different compilers and compiling the same code using the same compiler), neither of us picked up on the other person's point at the time.
Besides which, are accusing me of being fallible? That's not a difficult task, all humans are so. As to what "the vast majority of the economics profession" believes, I would point out that the track record of that profession in predicting the economic outcome of different decisions is poor at best.
- Patient0 13y agoWell, I would put it differently: you simply misunderstood what he (Walter) was saying, and then (too quickly) concluded that he therefore must have a deep misunderstanding! But I admit my critique is a bit unfair and "ad-hominem". I've been reading the financial press (in London, I work in the City) for the last 5 years. The austerity "caucus" - those who have advocated "austerity" policies - have simply been wrong every step of the way. They predicted hyper-inflation, high US treasury yields, and a strong recovery in Ireland (where austerity has been forced by the ECB). Instead we've had moderate to low inflation (too low at times), unprecedented low yields for sovereigns who can borrow in their own currency, and a never-ending recession/depression in Ireland. The "Keynesians" (Paul Krugman, Martin Wolfe, Joseph Stieglitz and many others) have been right. They have a working model (IS LM) which they refined after observing Japan's lost decade. They've used it to make predications, and been proved correct.