"But when it comes to basic economics, Sanders is totally out to lunch, which I assume he also believes should be free... Would a President Sanders demand that the National Zoo's pandas be returned to China so that two American bears can get those jobs?"
Video: https://www.facebook.com/Reason.Magazine/videos/10153106925809117/?fref=nf
My comment:
I'll try to ignore the subjective critics of this video such as those statements that include the word "embarrassing".
What I find kind of disturbing among many individuals who do not have a proper and deeper understanding of economics is that they believe that the only kind of theories that explain the market are those popularized by the marginalists (A.K.A. the neo-liberal school of thought). As a consequence, in day-to-day discussions they seem to ignore or avoid any other argument that serves as a critic to this school of thought. In the academia, however, there is no consensus of how markets really work. I want to think that this fact is due to the simplicity of marginalistic theories (of course, this only applies if Math is ignore).
The theory being discussed here is the most famous theory of David Ricardo although it's not his most important contribution to the understanding of markets: comparative advantage. This theory relies solely on the increasing amount of goods available due to specialization and availability of resources in a certain market but ignores sustainability and other long-run characteristics.
This theory was applied in Latin America about 100 years ago and brought nothing but stagnation. The idea was the we, latin americans, should be contributing with natural resources to the international markets and avoid industrialization because developed countries would be in charge of manufacture. Although I present this summary with negative connotations, it was a widely accepted belief as it is today with this North American case.
Thank God my pariente Prebisch got rid of it, and we got the opportunity to develop ourselves.
In North America, this political economy ideology (another branch of economics that most people ignore) goes around consumer sovereignty and "a nation who offers services is wealthy". Although it is true that manufactured goods can find cheaper prices if produced in China, it is also true that this behavior generates negative externalities. Do you deny that part of the inequality, shrinking middle class, price of education, and wage stagnation are not some of the negative externalities of importing from China?
Some counter-arguments will be that the price of life is decreasing and that we have cheaper goods available. However, the material characteristics of the U.S. have been increasing more rapidly than the decrease in the cost of life and the availability of cheaper goods. That last one I found it the most ridiculous (subjective here) because most of those cheaper goods are of lower quality and their fabrication destroys the environment.
However, the most interesting counter argument is services. Here's where the knowledge of economics is tested. And this one comes from microeconomics, the only branch of economics that seems to be known. Do most defenders of this ideology know the difference between an oligopolistic market and a market of competition besides the number of players? To understand this difference, we need to analyze the way services are produced. In short, they're more easily produce than manufacture because while manufacture requires an extensive combination of fixed capital, most new services only require an office.
In other words, it results more easily to enter to the service sector than to the manufacture sector being the service sector more competitive than manufacture. Empiracal economics demonstrates that less competitive sectors offer higher wages. (This is not a case for monopolies, to all those who are thinking in straw men). Also, the pure structure of manufacture offer more jobs. Of course, for business owners the first (sectors) is more defended than the second. We gotta include venture capitalist, the stock markets and etcetera that also are important.
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Monday, September 21, 2015
About Karl Marx
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/29/opinion/gabriel-karl-marx/index.html?eref=mrss_igoogle_cnn
I was reading this piece and remembered your attitude (which represents most libertarian's) towards Karl Marx himself, his ideology and the political discourse around his ideas. Of course, this attitude is mostly rhetorical fallacies used to increase supporters.
My introduction to marxism has been smoothly but gratifying. It formally started in the U.S. although I had the chance to meet his ideas a few years ago. The best lessons I've had to understand this world come from him. And, despite the violent misconceptions about it, Marxism is not solely upheavals; marxist theory is meant to be an attempt to understand the invisible constraints and idiosyncrasies of the current phase of humanity. It's a constant change towards justice through knowledge, debate and understanding.
Saturday, September 5, 2015
La guía de las mejores micheladas de Ayotlán: la más fría, la más exótica y la más elemental
Amo las micheladas. Cerveza, Clamato, salsa de soya, limón, sal y chile —una fiesta mexicana en la boca. Hay quienes gustan de agregar otros ingredientes, pero a mi me gusta lo simple. Contrario a la cerveza, se ha vuelto tradición servir una michelada en un vaso desechable con un popote clavado en el centro de una tapa de plástico para no derramarla mientras manejas —la irresponsabilidad mexicana, le dicen.
Su sencilla preparación y sabor la hacen la bebida más rápida y sabrosa. Las micheladas van desde medio litro (Tall en Starbucks) hasta colosales vasos de litro y medio (Venti en Starbucks). A pesar de esto, la preparación de una michelada puede ser tan solo tres minutos. Y es que no se requiere un curso extensivo para prepararla. No es un coctel elegante cuyo sabor cambia si la bebida es agitada en lugar de batida. Tampoco es un mojito cuya presentación e ingredientes son importantes. Para hacer una michelada solo es necesario un par de cervezas e ingredientes que se encuentran en cualquier cocina.
Esto, sin embargo, no quiere decir que una buena michelada sea una tarea que no requiera delicadeza. La michelada de un litro comúnmente lleva dos cervezas de vidrio —las normales de 350 mililitros cada una. Solo la cerveza lleva más de la mitad del espacio del vaso. Exactamente quedan 300 mililitros para el resto de los ingredientes. En este pequeño espacio está la clave de una buena michelada. Poco menos Clamato de lo adecuado y la michelada sabe únicamente a cerveza, poco Clamato de más y pierde su sabor de igual manera. La michelada necesita estar en balance con los ingredientes para que, como en los vinos, cuando la bebida pase la boca, la lengua pueda reconocer la mezcla de este popurrí mexicano.
Entonces sí es importante quien hace una michelada. A pesar de ser una rutina simple, quienes preparan micheladas tienen que hacerlo bien.
Esto, sin embargo, no quiere decir que una buena michelada sea una tarea que no requiera delicadeza. La michelada de un litro comúnmente lleva dos cervezas de vidrio —las normales de 350 mililitros cada una. Solo la cerveza lleva más de la mitad del espacio del vaso. Exactamente quedan 300 mililitros para el resto de los ingredientes. En este pequeño espacio está la clave de una buena michelada. Poco menos Clamato de lo adecuado y la michelada sabe únicamente a cerveza, poco Clamato de más y pierde su sabor de igual manera. La michelada necesita estar en balance con los ingredientes para que, como en los vinos, cuando la bebida pase la boca, la lengua pueda reconocer la mezcla de este popurrí mexicano.
Entonces sí es importante quien hace una michelada. A pesar de ser una rutina simple, quienes preparan micheladas tienen que hacerlo bien.
He tenido la fortuna de probar todas las micheladas en Ayotlán con otras dos personas. Así que, entre dos camaradas y yo, les presentamos lo que consideramos las mejores micheladas de Ayotlán.
Es importante tomar en cuenta que ésta lista no lleva un orden particular y que no hubo consenso para elegir la mejor michelada —al menos por ahora.
El Aguaje (Centro)
 |
| Micheladas El Aguaje |
Atravesando una cortina de carrizos de un pequeño local decorado al puro estilo revolucionario que canta ¡Viva México!, ¡Viva Villa!, se encuentra una de las mejores micheladas de Ayotlán. A pesar de lo cautivador del establecimiento, El Aguaje no es exactamente para románticos, sino para quienes apetecen de tomarse una cerveza con amigos. Quienes atienden apapchan a los comensales con gustitos mexicanos típicos que van desde duros con chile hasta una rica fruta picada.
Lo que separa a las micheladas de El Aguaje del resto en Ayotlán es su frescura. A pesar de atender a una extensa clientela, quienes preparan las
micheladas conocen bien lo que es “una cerveza bien fría.” Todos los ingredientes, desde el Clamato hasta las botellas de cerveza, son guardadas previamente en el refrigerado para mantener la temperatura de la michelada fría. Además, los limones son de la más alta calidad michoacana: grandes y jugosos. En corto, El Aguaje ofrece las micheladas más frías porque saben como mantener los ingredientes frescos.
Como lo mencione antes, una michelada es un balance. En la michelada del aguaje no hay exceso ni en el jugo de tomate, ni en el resto de los ingredientes que siempre están frescos. Por esta razón, la michelada de El Aguaje es la más fría.
Si quieres ver una foto panorámica de aquí, presiona o copia el siguiente link:
https://plus.google.com/photos/108987436298286343510/albums/6049789374717840081/6191088556721802258?pid=6191088556721802258&oid=108987436298286343510
Lo que separa a las micheladas de El Aguaje del resto en Ayotlán es su frescura. A pesar de atender a una extensa clientela, quienes preparan las
Como lo mencione antes, una michelada es un balance. En la michelada del aguaje no hay exceso ni en el jugo de tomate, ni en el resto de los ingredientes que siempre están frescos. Por esta razón, la michelada de El Aguaje es la más fría.
Si quieres ver una foto panorámica de aquí, presiona o copia el siguiente link:
https://plus.google.com/photos/108987436298286343510/albums/6049789374717840081/6191088556721802258?pid=6191088556721802258&oid=108987436298286343510
Este lugar se encuentra en:
Hidalgo eje Oriente 154, Centro. El segundo local del edificio que se encuentra a contra esquina de la farmacia en la intersección de la avenida Hidalgo y la calle Morelos.
Hidalgo eje Oriente 154, Centro. El segundo local del edificio que se encuentra a contra esquina de la farmacia en la intersección de la avenida Hidalgo y la calle Morelos.
Licorería “La Curvita”
 |
| Micheladas Licorería "La Curvita" |
Nada relaja más que estar en tu propio hogar. Licorería “La Curvita” es como la segunda casa de muchos. Es lo más cercano a una cantina tradicional en México pues aquí los rostros siempre son los mismas. Aunque es un sitio más frecuentado por hombres que por mujeres, en la Licorería “La Curvita” todos son felices un Sábado de quincena por la tarde tomando una michelada. Un lugar de compadrazgo pues si no somos todos cuñados, primos o amigos en Ayotlán, podemos tener la certeza que somos compadres.
Aquí preparan la michelada ¡bale berga la bida!. En corto, ésta michelada lleva todo lo que lleva una común, pero con un toque chilango. Ya sean camarones, fruta o chamoy —o una combinación de todo— en el tope, quienes atienden aquí son pioneros en estas practicas. Además, cada michelada sustituye el popote de plástico por un palito de tamarindo haciéndolas aun más sabrosas. Quizá no inventaron este tipo de micheladas, pero estoy seguro que estuvieron ahí cuando pasó.
Como ya resalté anteriormente, las mejores micheladas son un balance. A pesar de que en “La Curvita” se la juega con los tamaños y las decoraciones, se respetan los ingredientes: 70% cerveza, 30% armonía. No tomaría una bebida mala por más llamativa que parezca, pero a ésta michelada le doy el premio de la más exotica.
Si quieres ver una foto panorámica de aquí, presiona o copia el siguiente link:
https://plus.google.com/photos/108987436298286343510/albums/6049789374717840081/6190355816257781250?pid=6190355816257781250&oid=108987436298286343510
Si quieres ver una foto panorámica de aquí, presiona o copia el siguiente link:
https://plus.google.com/photos/108987436298286343510/albums/6049789374717840081/6190355816257781250?pid=6190355816257781250&oid=108987436298286343510
Este lugar se encuentra en:
Avenida González Gallo, 222. Como su nombre lo dice, justamente en la curvita de la carretera yendo a Degollado. En frente de la Vesti-plaza. “No hay pierde.”
El Guacamayo.
 |
| Micheladas El Guacamayo |
La última de las mejores micheladas de Ayotlán se encuentra en un establecimiento poco conocido por los Ayenses, pero aplaudido por sus clientes: El Guacamayo. Este lugar le abre sus puertas a todos quienes, aburridos del trabajo, van ahí para romper la monotonía. El Guacamayo tiene un estilo bonachón, como para motociclistas y gente que goza de lo campechano. Sobran los lugares para sentarse si se sabe buscar —ya sea en “el sillón que siempre ha estado ahí” o simplemente recargarse en la barra y contar unos buenos chistes es aceptable. Definitivamente uno de los puestos más amenos para tomar una michelada.
La michelada de El Guacamayo es como un clásico moderno. Es una muestra de simplicidad para gustos culposos. También es experiencia y detalle al mismo tiempo que exquisites. Servida en un vaso desechable como ya es tradición, ésta michelada no le pide nada a ninguna de las pasadas —es la michelada como Dios la trajo al mundo. “Si tu intención es describir la verdad, hazlo con sencillez y la elegancia déjasela al sastre”.
Siendo la amalgama perfecta de sabores, la michelada de El Guacamayo es el sitio perfecto para empezar este recorrido que también es gastronómico: la más elemental.
Si quieres ver una foto panorámica de aquí, presiona o copia el siguiente link:
https://plus.google.com/photos/108987436298286343510/albums/6049789374717840081/6190043964205429298?pid=6190043964205429298&oid=108987436298286343510
Este lugar se encuentra en:
Avenida Gonzáles Gallo, SN. Por la carretera que va a Degollado en la salida del pueblo. Justo donde se encuentra la llantera con el mismo nombre.
Mapa para encontrar el lugar:
Tuesday, September 1, 2015
#FeelTheBern what's up with socialism and the american way?
This post presents a personal opinion about the environment around Sen. Bernie Sanders and his strife to win the electoral fight.
Since I live in the U.S., I've perceived a common denominator of the U.S. society: ignorance of what does not produce direct utility.
Despite that most americans are very hard workers and entrepreneurs, they often oversight the value of education and details. For instance, in international negotiation, american entrepreneurs are considered very paramedic. They like closing deals as soon as possible. Most americans consider as waste of time getting to know the culture of the people they make business with whenever they are the strongest piece of the deal; they simply want to see statistics with higher and higher peaks. On the other hand, american customers love fast tracks, fast past, fast food and anything that starts with the word fast. The fast culture is so rooted in the american life because "time is money".
They like their ways. In the most conservative spectrum of the american society lays a strong sense of nationalism: "the american way". Most americans may easily turn down any foreign influence to a bucket list of countries to visit. How can they be blamed if they live in the best nation on Earth?
As a consequence of all this patriotism, anything that does not resemble to their identity is unwanted. Taking driving as example, I once invited a colleague friend of mine to my house to work, and after a few hours, I asked him if he felt like going for some pizza to a place less than quarter of a mile from my home. His answer after I told him that I rather walk than drive was"it's not the way we do things in this country"; he was serious. Another more vile example is Islam. It's common to see astonishment on americans when they see the news talking about muslim men who marry more than one woman. Their family model is entrenched in their set of beliefs that even the gay marriage movement struggled to succeed in the U.S.
And this common pattern appears in every aspect of their lives such as politics and economics. Despite that most american voters see themselves as liberals and progressives, words like socialism are unfairly marked as "anti-american", so the benefits of an active government are often neglected.
Among the most conservative and lesser conservative media, socialism is used as an adjective for rhetoric purposes. Obama is considered a socialist, so is obamacare. Hillary Clinton is a socialist for supporting reforms to improve education. Taxes are socialist; regulations are socialist; any kind of government intervention is socialism. In other words, anything that differs from the conservative conception that a rightist politician may support is rapidly tag as socialism to unbalance the debate.
As foreign influences, americans separate themselves from the word socialism because they believe that the american dream was achieved individually instead of collectively.
However, most americans don't know that the golden age of the U.S. would be considered as socialism on today's standards. The age between the end of the WWII and the implementation of the economic reforms commonly known as Reaganomics is characterized for a strong government intervention. The U.S. government based on a then-prominent economic doctrine, keynesianism, regulated many aspects of the markets and offered several social services to its citizens. During this period of time, wages raised and economic social mobility was higher than now while unemployment was low.
This trend of economic welfare exists among other countries and periods of time represented by strong government intervention. Some Latin American governments took a similar path like their american counterparts that happened to be during the same period of time. Latin American governments enacted several economic reforms with the only purpose of promoting the industrialization of their countries. The end result: a huge improvement of the socio-economic conditions of their citizens. On a more current example, the countries that have the highest standards of living in terms of education and social mobility have also a strong government: Denmark, Finland and Sweden for instance.
Although many americans might not want to accept that this positive improvement what's now known as socialism, they really would like to live in this period.
Bernie Sanders offers this period back for the americans. He's seeking a 180 degrees change in political economics. He considers himself a Scandinavian socialist. He also knows that the influence of big businesses have favored the rich over the poor, and it has resulted in the decline of the living conditions of the americans despite the grow that GDP has had in the last couple of decades. In essence, Sanders offers a change from a deregulated country to a one that promotes government intervention in similar ways to the golden age.
However, Sanders' main barrier is cultural rather than political. Americans don't understand what socialism really is because their culture dictates that socialism is anti-american. But, if americans want a prosperous age again, they have look beyond the common knowledge.
References:
[1]. http://economics.csusb.edu/studentsAlumni/Coyote%20Economist%20Spring%202015.pdf
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Sí, así es como realmente se vería el cielo de noche si no hubiera contaminación de luz artificial. Es sorprendente.
 |
| Rio de Janeiro sin contaminación de luz artificial. Neronexus. Imgur.com [1] |
De la misma manera que lo hacen a mi, las estrellas han desatado la imaginación humana. Religiones, mitos, leyendas y anhelos vienen de mirar arriba de noche. El cinturón de orion, por ejemplo, ¿sabías que fueron la inspiración para los tres reyes magos? Ese mismo manto de estrellas se ve desde todas partes del mundo. La tierra gira alrededor del sol y sobre su eje. La percepción de las constelaciones y el sol cuentan historias también. No es un misterio que muchas leyendas alrededor del mundo sean similares.
Platon, Aristoteles, Isaac Newton. Todos ellos tuvieron la oportunidad de mirar a las estrellas y desafiar lo establecido. En donde domina la razón, el poder del hombre tiembla.
Como historia humana, las estrellas fueron nuestra primer admiración y hoy muy pocos tienen la dicha de verlas como hace solo 50 años.
Le preguntaba a mis papás como era la noche cuando ellos eran niños: majestuosa. "Se iba la luz por la noche, y mi mamá (mi abuela) nos mandaba a comprar petróleo para las lamparas. Entonces veíamos tantas estrellas que ni podíamos contar."
Esta situación ha cambiado. Hoy en día, desde el mismo lugar donde mi mamá veía una inmensidad iluminada naturalmente, hoy puedo contar estrellas en medio de un manto negro.
Como humanos, hemos hecho grandes avances morales en el cuidado del planeta y la sana convivencia. Hablamos de contaminación ambiental, protegemos los bosques y no tiramos basura para proteger los mares y a quienes lo habitan. México es de los primeros países en vías de desarrollo en comprometerse a reducir las emisiones de CO2. Hablamos del sufrimiento de los animales y nos abstenemos de comer carne. Cuidamos del necesitado y buscamos la manera de establecer sociedad más justas. Hablamos de contaminación auditiva mientras embellecemos nuestras calles y parques.
Sin embargo, hay un tipo de contaminación que pasa desapercibida: contaminación de luz artificial. Este tipo de contaminación es causada por nuestra necesidad de sentirnos seguros. Por nuestros hábitos de consumo que nos llevan a crear "ciudades que nunca duermen". Nuestras comodidades y complejos nos han alejado de una belleza natural que se encargó de forjar quienes somos ahora.
Todo este tipo de iluminación nos lleva a que los cielos se tornen negros en lugar de azules e inspiradores. Calles iluminadas, edificios de colores exhorbitantes, luces neon y lamparas especialmente diseñadas para resaltar monumentos. Todo esto es hermoso, pero nos estamos negando el derecho a la noche con estrellas. Si Platon, Aristoteles e Isaac Newton soñaron y cambiaron el mundo volteando a las estrellas, entonces nos estamos negando este derecho [2].
Es entendible que la luz sea una comodidad que trae más beneficios que externalidades negativas, pero mucho del uso de la luz es desmesurado e innecesario. Por ejemplo, en ciudades grandes con rascacielos para oficinas, pisos enteros mantienen sus luces encendidas por la noche aunque no haya nadie dentro. La publicidad simplemente no tiene un bien utilitario; ¿realmente necesitamos saber donde hay un McDonalds a las 12 de la noche cuando tenemos teléfonos celulares? Incluso mucho del alumbrado publico se desperdicia en calles solitarias. Paulatinamente vamos perdiendo ésta belleza natural.
 |
| La escala de Bortle mide la cantidad de iluminación de un lugar y su efecto en la visualización de las estrellas. [3] |
Las estrellas están ahí, pero nosotros las hemos cubierto con un manto de iluminación excesiva. Lo que anteriormente nos hizo soñar y dar pasos adelante se nos ha sido arrebatado por prejuicios y consumo sin control. ¿Cuánta luz es necesaria para sentirnos seguros? ¿Realmente necesitamos esa luz encendida? ¿Cuánta iluminación es necesaria? Nos estamos negando el derecho a la noche con estrellas.
Referencias:
[1]. http://imgur.com/gallery/Yrb9S
[2]. Nocturne es un podcast dedicado a mostrar que es lo que pasa mientras duermas, cuando la oscuridad se roba las calles. En el episodio 7 (The Vanishing Dark), Vanessa Lowe, la productora y narradora, expone el problema de la contaminación de luz artificial en las sociedades modernas: http://www.nocturnepodcast.org/ep-7-the-vanishing-dark/
[3]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bortle_scale
[4]. Light Pollution Atlas 2006: http://djlorenz.github.io/astronomy/lp2006/
Wages, supply and demand, and economists.
This is a thought after reading Paul Krugman's Liberal and Wages on on the Wall Street Journal:
Classical economists claim that raising minimum wages bring adverse outcomes such as unemployment and job market discrimination based solely upon an obsolete economic model known as supply a demand.
Economic research has proven the contrary:
Artificially raising minimum wages do not bring unemployment. All the contrary, it brings more employment at the same time that forces employers to innovate and optimize their resources
According to this same conservative ideology, an increase of productivity should bring higher wages. However, the last few decades had proven the contrary again. The U.S. has experienced a huge increase of productivity while wages for workers have been stagnated. In other words, all the new wealth created by the U.S. has been going to the top. As a result, "the rich gets richer while the poor gets poorer": increasing inequality.
Rightist politicians are afraid to talk academically about this problem because they know their arguments are based only on tea-party-like dogmatism, american dream cliches and Marco Rubio arguments. In other words, their arguments are nothing more than bullshit.
"Many economists used to think of the labor market as being pretty much like the market for anything else, with the prices of different kinds of labor — that is, wage rates — fully determined by supply and demand. So if wages for many workers have stagnated or declined, it must be because demand for their services is falling."
Reference:
[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/17/opinion/paul-krugman-liberals-and-wages.html?smid=fb-nytopinion&smtyp=cur&_r=1
Is ideology important in Economics?
The study of economics has been monopolized in the last decades. A current tradition dominates the decision-making of most rightist and leftist politicians in the U.S. and the teaching of economics. Some basic and fundamental laws steer the markets and lead them to positive outcomes. Economics claims to be a science.
I'm afraid of the latter. If economics is considered a science, there will not be debates about the validity of economic theories, and the application of these theories will be considered the only truth. This, in the same way as biology and mathematics, will lead to apply theories as tools with out considering their epistemology.
Some students of economics, and myself once, think that there should not be debate about the history of economic analysis, or that identifying each school of thought is unnecessary; "we should focus on the application instead of ideological debates". If this happens, if we do not consider ideological debates in our analysis, we may be considering mistaken conceptions about the functionality of markets.
Supply and demand is prevalent among student of economics and trained economists. It is a very simple idea that embodies almost any kind of action in a society. If there's more supply than demand, we have excess of supply then price falls. If there's more demand than supply, we have excess of demand then price raises.
On this path of thought, economists and almost everybody apply this kind of analysis to real life events. The acquisition of a new car, flirting somebody, and even hipsters devaluate fashion tendencies when "they become too mainstream": it's supply and demand, dude.
Yes, I'm simplifying. However, I've heard these commentaries among economists andmuggles other professionals.
We stopped questioning our habits of thought to offer a simple question to everything. In the same way as religion, it is very comfortable to explain everything in God-terms than trying to find reliable explanations. "Have faith and markets will self-regulate." Like it happened in the 1930's.
On supply and demand terms, no ugly man would have a beautiful girlfriend. This is because ssuming ceteris paribus and that the only changing variable is beauty (the economy is study that way), there would not exist couples in which the woman is insanely beautiful (like you ;) ) and the man is close to a skinny Shrek (like me). However, the world is full of these inconsistencies that it results incorrect to assume that beauty is the only variable to consider.
We cannot simplify as much as the study of relationships in the same way as we cannot simplify the study of economics.
In the real life, all people take personal decisions based on multiple variables and create all posible scenarios although the outcome can be different to any of those scenarios.
Let's assume that simplifying the decision-making in life is an ideology, would you make the decision of choosing a parter based solely on beauty? Then, ideology matters in personal life.
Hence, up there, where everything happens, where the big discussions take place and decisions about the future of millions are made everyday, is ideology important?
Let me share with you this video before proceeding:
Yes, I know this videos oversimplifies how Walmart operates everywhere in the U.S. and other countries. But the issue I want you to focus is the following: this video assumes that the increase on wages will lead to higher prices, not higher unemployment. Actually, multiple studies suggest that this is what really happens [1].
This assumption is different to what the neoclassical tradition suggests. Neoclassical economists claim that an artificial increase on wage (floor ceilings) will lead to a situation of unemployment. This comes from the idea of supply and demand for labor. High prices of labor will lead to less demand for labor and viceversa.
Does it make sense? Of course, we have heard that so many times that somehow it has become a habit of thought already in the same way as stopping in red.
In contrast, the keynesian tradition assumes that nominal salaries are not as important to determine employment. What matters before hiring is the expectation of entrepreneurs. If entrepreneurs believe that they're having a good year, the will hire as much employees as needed to produce what they expect they're going to sell. Entrepreneurs are good with these calculation, they may hire you to do so.
Does it make sense? Entrepreneurs doing calculations on their costs and expectation to find profit?
According to this ideology, salaries are not as important when hiring like in the neoclassical tradition. What matters is expectations to the future.
Actually, this is closer to what really happens and some people avoid this idea for considering supply and demand.
For politicians using the theoretical frame of Keynes, they can advocate for higher wages.
For politicians using the theoretical frame of the Neoclassicals, they will not advocate for higher wages.
Then, ideology matters in the study of economics. Even so, we still teach economics as it is only supply and demand. People stop questioning the validity of theories and make decisions based on these ideas because they believe they are the only truth. They even vote for politicians who accept these conceptions and avoid politicians who question!!
Of course, I'm not claiming that Keynes is correct on everything he said or that the neoclassical tradition is incorrect completely. If you assume this from my writing, then you have a serious problem comprehension. The issue is that you have to question what you're told.
Endnotes:
[1] For the sake of this discussion (ideology matters), I will simplify: Walmart is, for instance, operating already with all employees it needs. Walmart would not close a store if its production costs raises unless it is for a considerable amount.
References:
YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAcaeLmybCY
I'm afraid of the latter. If economics is considered a science, there will not be debates about the validity of economic theories, and the application of these theories will be considered the only truth. This, in the same way as biology and mathematics, will lead to apply theories as tools with out considering their epistemology.
Some students of economics, and myself once, think that there should not be debate about the history of economic analysis, or that identifying each school of thought is unnecessary; "we should focus on the application instead of ideological debates". If this happens, if we do not consider ideological debates in our analysis, we may be considering mistaken conceptions about the functionality of markets.
Supply and demand is prevalent among student of economics and trained economists. It is a very simple idea that embodies almost any kind of action in a society. If there's more supply than demand, we have excess of supply then price falls. If there's more demand than supply, we have excess of demand then price raises.
On this path of thought, economists and almost everybody apply this kind of analysis to real life events. The acquisition of a new car, flirting somebody, and even hipsters devaluate fashion tendencies when "they become too mainstream": it's supply and demand, dude.
Yes, I'm simplifying. However, I've heard these commentaries among economists and
We stopped questioning our habits of thought to offer a simple question to everything. In the same way as religion, it is very comfortable to explain everything in God-terms than trying to find reliable explanations. "Have faith and markets will self-regulate." Like it happened in the 1930's.
On supply and demand terms, no ugly man would have a beautiful girlfriend. This is because ssuming ceteris paribus and that the only changing variable is beauty (the economy is study that way), there would not exist couples in which the woman is insanely beautiful (like you ;) ) and the man is close to a skinny Shrek (like me). However, the world is full of these inconsistencies that it results incorrect to assume that beauty is the only variable to consider.
We cannot simplify as much as the study of relationships in the same way as we cannot simplify the study of economics.
In the real life, all people take personal decisions based on multiple variables and create all posible scenarios although the outcome can be different to any of those scenarios.
Let's assume that simplifying the decision-making in life is an ideology, would you make the decision of choosing a parter based solely on beauty? Then, ideology matters in personal life.
Hence, up there, where everything happens, where the big discussions take place and decisions about the future of millions are made everyday, is ideology important?
Let me share with you this video before proceeding:
Yes, I know this videos oversimplifies how Walmart operates everywhere in the U.S. and other countries. But the issue I want you to focus is the following: this video assumes that the increase on wages will lead to higher prices, not higher unemployment. Actually, multiple studies suggest that this is what really happens [1].
This assumption is different to what the neoclassical tradition suggests. Neoclassical economists claim that an artificial increase on wage (floor ceilings) will lead to a situation of unemployment. This comes from the idea of supply and demand for labor. High prices of labor will lead to less demand for labor and viceversa.
Does it make sense? Of course, we have heard that so many times that somehow it has become a habit of thought already in the same way as stopping in red.
In contrast, the keynesian tradition assumes that nominal salaries are not as important to determine employment. What matters before hiring is the expectation of entrepreneurs. If entrepreneurs believe that they're having a good year, the will hire as much employees as needed to produce what they expect they're going to sell. Entrepreneurs are good with these calculation, they may hire you to do so.
Does it make sense? Entrepreneurs doing calculations on their costs and expectation to find profit?
According to this ideology, salaries are not as important when hiring like in the neoclassical tradition. What matters is expectations to the future.
Actually, this is closer to what really happens and some people avoid this idea for considering supply and demand.
For politicians using the theoretical frame of Keynes, they can advocate for higher wages.
For politicians using the theoretical frame of the Neoclassicals, they will not advocate for higher wages.
Then, ideology matters in the study of economics. Even so, we still teach economics as it is only supply and demand. People stop questioning the validity of theories and make decisions based on these ideas because they believe they are the only truth. They even vote for politicians who accept these conceptions and avoid politicians who question!!
Of course, I'm not claiming that Keynes is correct on everything he said or that the neoclassical tradition is incorrect completely. If you assume this from my writing, then you have a serious problem comprehension. The issue is that you have to question what you're told.
Endnotes:
[1] For the sake of this discussion (ideology matters), I will simplify: Walmart is, for instance, operating already with all employees it needs. Walmart would not close a store if its production costs raises unless it is for a considerable amount.
References:
YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAcaeLmybCY
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)