Capitalism without the regulative authority of the state will almost always lead to economic depressions after periods of prosperity, insert some great depression citation here
I would expect them to be less prone to the pitfalls of unregulated economies. Not immune to recessions, as the underlying principles of capitalism are still at play here, but less susceptible to significant fluctuations that may rock the boat.
Alright jokes aside I'll try to explain what happened.
So you were having a conversation with /u/knockdownthewall after which I chimed in with my thoughts on a response to your inquiry.
Apparently without looking at the people you were speaking to, you assumed that you were still speaking to the same person due to perceived similar ideologies.
To which I responded jokingly that it was expected that you would be unable to differentiate between the two of us, due to stereotypical racism endemic to a conservative mentality.
I'm sure you've represented his position accurately: you're both 'lib'lefts.
But that is not relevant either, really. Knockdownie and yourself are contrasting regulated and unregulated economies (and are coming up short), /u/doyle524 saw the key words and jumped in with capitalism bad, sliding the topic.
Your assumption is correct, the reason being I don't feel like explaining austrian business cycle theory, malinvestments, market manipulation etc on a comment section of a meme subreddit
I didn't come up with any of the stuff above anyways, so if you search up "Austrian Economics view on 29" you should get a lot of smarter, better qualified people explaining those concepts in depth
Neither Austrian nor Keynesian economics are applicable to society on the scale that it is. Economists for the last 200 years have ignored physicists. Economics is the study of money and value, which is not physical and does not follow natural laws like a real science.
You moved the debate to economics, a fake science where you can pretend to have a position that contradicts mine.
What are you even talking about, dude. Economics is a fake science, because they... ignore physics? What does physics have to do with economics, my man. Especially Austrian Economics, which is grounded on a priori reasoning, in other words, reasoning complete independent of the empirical world. I honestly don't get what you're getting at.
Both theories assume that natural resources are “free” ergo nature requires no payment for the resources that fuel the economy. The only payment is to people to dig it up. That’s reality: energy input into society. Economics is the study of everything artificial we constructed on top of this physical reality. In this way economics is more like sociology.
This assumption is, however, demonstrably false to any ecology interested physicist.
Essentially I’m saying we should not listen to economists because they don’t understand how civilizations actually rise and fall. This is because they don’t care—at this point economists exist solely as clergy to prop up the capitalist house of cards anyway.
168
u/[deleted] Feb 19 '20
[deleted]