What Is Economics About? | How & How NOT to Do Economics with Robert Skidelsky

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 2024
  • Why did economists largely fail to predict the 2008-09 financial crisis? In the first lecture in his INET series, “How and How Not to do Economics,” Robert Skidelsky looks at a neglected cause: methodology. The way economists build their models determines the answers they give to practical questions.
    INET sincerely thanks the Julis-Rabinowitz Family for their generous support, who named this series to honor the spirit of a great educator and economic thinker, Uwe Reinhardt.
    For nearly 50 years, the late Uwe Reinhardt was a beloved economist and professor at Princeton University. Known best for helping to shape critical discourse around healthcare markets, his biting wit and intellect challenged students, colleagues, and policymakers alike to follow the data and to check all assumptions at the door.
    INET also thanks Rethinking Economics for their voices and contributions.

ความคิดเห็น • 21

  • @fruitycigar
    @fruitycigar 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    "The contemporary generation of economists, despite being technically better, understand less." As someone who gave up on Economics after having studied it in a university setting, I'm slowly finding my way back to it, thanks to individuals like Robert Skidelsky. Thank you, so, so, much for this.

  • @waynemcmillan5970
    @waynemcmillan5970 5 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    Thanks Robert for bringing back attention to methodology. The absence of the study of the History of Economic Thought has been telling. Sadly conventional economic wisdom has failed humanity and we now need a NEW ECONOMICS.

  • @fbritorufino
    @fbritorufino 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is gold. It's so good to have this material to better show people (esp. from outside economics, even more so from a discipline being invaded by ours) what pains me so deeply in my profession.

  • @etbadaboum
    @etbadaboum 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Thanks a lot for this series!

  • @h.a.70
    @h.a.70 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is phenomenal!

  • @UBIeconomics
    @UBIeconomics 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I like the suggested goal for economists here. "To improve material welfare."
    Note that this is not the express policy of most states or banks today. Today, the goal of macroeconomic policy is: full employment. To that end, I'm afraid we mostly succeed. Despite many warning signals that it may be unwise.
    For a fiscal & monetary policy proposal oriented around sustainable distribution instead, see Alex Howlett and his description of Consumer Monetary Theory.

    • @stuckinthemud4352
      @stuckinthemud4352 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Can u tell me how value is removed or added to an economic system. Everyone listens to these complicated economic videos but if u dont know the fundamentals none of it makes sense.

  • @dr.zawwin5833
    @dr.zawwin5833 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for the video.

  • @dickhamilton3517
    @dickhamilton3517 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    central planning will be back in the end. The Soviet planners had little information about what was going on; they had to go on information that was always late, always insufficient and usually dishonest. But they had no, or hardly any, computers, and no data highways. Nowadays, Walmart does an amazing job of logistics and 'resource allocation'. Planning will be absolutely necessary once the need for rationing can't be ignored any longer.

  • @BramSarjana
    @BramSarjana 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    ...."Economics is obviously not a search engine for truth"...

  • @davidwilkie9551
    @davidwilkie9551 ปีที่แล้ว

    The concept of the Floating Point in Mathematical Disproof Methodology has yet to impinge on those who "believe" in science, but only have rituals in practice.
    Fair enough, no one knows anything absolutely unless they "make decisions" in the character of magic expectations that what has worked before, will probably work again. Default method is to use military threats, as noted.

  • @rushdHBTS
    @rushdHBTS 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Some people not Economist by Profession predicted the 2008 Crush only months before it happened. His friends designated him as " Mad " .
    He predicted when he saw some United States Banks and Big companies started counting in ●Billions ● all on sudden from Counting in □ Millions □ .
    Then Practical Economics is a Subject of Economist only ?

  • @emmanuelameyaw6806
    @emmanuelameyaw6806 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Contemporary economists are technically better but they understand less...i agree.

  • @ayubaalim2201
    @ayubaalim2201 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    economics in power structure

  • @kmakiable
    @kmakiable ปีที่แล้ว

    The main problem I have with Economics Studies is their silence on human oppression, enslavement through Capitalism, the on going printing of money by central banks to bailout failing corrupt corporations while hard working innocent people are losing properties and life savings and pension funds. Economics has also turned a blind to corrupt relationships between politicians and Coporations aka lobbying which has produced policies and regulations that alowed unlimited exploitation of people and resources while also damaging the environment

  • @collian
    @collian 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I've always thought of economics as some sort of pseudo science / common sense

    • @JasonGafar
      @JasonGafar 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Economics, a pseudo science? Common sense? Utter madness.

  • @ziahassanrupu
    @ziahassanrupu 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    i have transcribed this and tried to understand this. This is a mumbo jumbo and very conflicting ideas packaged with academic eloquence. waste of times