tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post8343853805801177644..comments2023-10-23T19:50:05.472+01:00Comments on Labour Roots Project: Policy Development 001Tim Wilkinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15237522140184882034noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-41865461881556074872016-06-15T20:04:37.503+01:002016-06-15T20:04:37.503+01:00@stevemanc There is no economics thread. That is n...@stevemanc There is no economics thread. That is not what the site is for.<br /><br />Let me clarify a couple of things:<br /><br />1. The aim is to develop systems for collaborative research & policy development and the production of informational and PR materials. This ought to be clear enough to anyone who has read any of the posts.<br /><br />2. The aim here is not to keep changing our discussion format until it is perfect but to get on with the discussion. We are trying to assemble notes, while you keep telling us we should be concentrating on getting a nicer notebook and copying our notes into it.<br /><br />If you have useful comments to make that address the issues we are discussing here, please go ahead and make them here.<br /><br />But if not, please find somewhere else to leave your remarks, since they are simply getting in the way of our discussion, and in particular driving other people's comments out of the 'recent comments' list which is intended to keep that discussion going.<br /><br />I'm sorry if this is comes over as impatient or even rude. I don't particularly seek to be. But more important to me (and I think the other members of the team) is to ensure that the limited time and energy we can spare here is used to progress the project without disruption.Tim Wilkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15237522140184882034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-2040357492690039492016-06-15T17:21:47.760+01:002016-06-15T17:21:47.760+01:00And perhaps you can alter the thread title to refe...And perhaps you can alter the thread title to refer to mechanisms. As it is, people could imagine this is the place to devlop policy. Including economic policy.stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-70922915126670567602016-06-15T17:18:01.022+01:002016-06-15T17:18:01.022+01:00You are of course, correct, this is not the place ...You are of course, correct, this is not the place for the economics discussion. perhaps you want to move my and David's comments to a lower priority economics thread further down the list?stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-58252547261119611382016-06-15T17:02:33.512+01:002016-06-15T17:02:33.512+01:00As Tim said, we're getting badly off-topic. Th...As Tim said, we're getting badly off-topic. This is meant to be about policy development <b>mechanisms</b>, not our own theories and interpretations. On the collaborative working page, I have laid out some proposals for how to develop policy. I'd be interested to hear people's responses. It certainly is not a complete system, but it could be a place to start? That said, I feel like maybe our first priority should be to develop a system to produce responses to contributions put forward by experts, as I describe in the paragraph Tim quoted in this article.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10829113438211196212noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-61632422564713543022016-06-15T14:46:17.431+01:002016-06-15T14:46:17.431+01:00I think i prefer loomio currently thanks to its co...I think i prefer loomio currently thanks to its collaborative editing, so lets move there, but theres LOTS still to improve and ive listed it on Loomio. i think momentumunofficial.freeforums.net will be best for the further improvements, because its the most customisable of the fora. But if anyone comes up with anything yet better, i'm happy to hear about it.<br /><br />Stevenstevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-13880105889044564642016-06-15T14:39:33.411+01:002016-06-15T14:39:33.411+01:00I think you're right - this conversation shoul...I think you're right - this conversation should be conducted at some other location, perhaps your own site. <br /><br />This blog is only for discussion, design and planning of the 'Labour Roots Project'.<br /><br />Having to sift through off-topic comments and general chit-chat is rapi9dly going to become a pain in the neck and impede our efforts to maintain clear focus and make practical progress.Tim Wilkinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15237522140184882034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-27806228892464795262016-06-15T13:04:26.558+01:002016-06-15T13:04:26.558+01:00"We are not at a point at which things like t..."We are not at a point at which things like this can be said as if they had an evident and clear meaning. We do not yet have a common language and if we think that such a language is readily available by delving into a few current textbooks then I am sure will will never emerge with a sane picture of the world we want to change."<br /><br />in any discussion there must be disambiguation. The greater the disambiguiation the greater the clarity and the more productive the discussion.<br /><br />Mathematicians troutinely spend more time explaining what ther terms mean than they do using those terms and manipulating them.<br /><br />But such a discussion should be in a place like the loomio group whewre ive posted a prioritised model for optimised discussion functionality.<br /><br />"A model of the sort of critique of concepts I am talking of was given by Marx in his Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy (not the Preface). Our social thinking has still not got to the point reached by Marx all that time ago."<br /><br />I'll take a look once the discussion platform is functional. That is more urgent.<br /><br />"Establishing clear communication is not going to be easy because socialist thought traditions have withered so badly."<br /><br />We agree entirely. Right wingers like the guy on the momentum unofficial forum rages at empty socialist "value signalling" rhetoric, which essentially comes down to pseudointellectual attempts to feign an intellectual and moral image.<br /><br />I dont think we see too much socialist analysis of fundamentals because the core notions of socialism, like many of the neoliberal and capitalist notions, dont withstand scrutiny.<br /><br />Im happy to join in rasining the level of debate.<br /><br /><br />But first the discussion platform mechanics must be correct.<br /><br />Thats what my most recent loomio thread is for.<br /><br />right now i am typing in a small box with a small character limit on a page thats difficult to browse with no thread priortisation, seperation or collaborative editing and then having to seperate my response into three seperate replies.<br /><br />This sucks and is too inefficient for practical purposes.<br /><br />Lets build something better.<br /><br />Loomio is a step in the right direction.<br /><br />stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-71220771063690569052016-06-15T13:02:18.694+01:002016-06-15T13:02:18.694+01:00"you think that ... microeconomics is a ready..."you think that ... microeconomics is a ready made field of knowledge which one can pick up an study,"<br /><br />1) There's plenty of work that's been done already and this can be found in standard texts on the subject.<br /><br />Try<br /><br />https://www.amazon.com/Microeconomic-Theory-Andreu-Mas-Colell/dp/0195073401<br /><br />Or if that is too dense, some other math work that will help you grasp it.<br /><br />===<br /><br />"that macroeconomics is by contrast pseudo-scienc....." "I also find the suggestion that macro as opposed to micro economics is pseudo-science rather bizarre since capitalism must be understood as a whole"<br /><br />The macro of any science is merely an aggregate of the micro. To seperate them implies theres pseudoscience going on. microbiology doesnt have conceptual differences with macrobiology like , microeconomics does with macroeconomics<br /><br />===<br /><br />"I think that left-wing debate should start from a critique of all social science concepts and not from accepting them as a given."<br /><br />Some concepts are proven and well established. Such as elasticity and nash equilibria. Atempting to critique these things is akin to attempting to critique general relativity.<br /><br />Humanity has done a lot of work already, its important to know the building blocks that exist already.<br /><br />===<br /><br /><br />"and if you start from the factory and work upwards what you end up with is accounting and not economics."<br /><br />Accounting data is economic data. it isnt seperate.<br />stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-89818248517339434572016-06-15T11:46:24.575+01:002016-06-15T11:46:24.575+01:00Thanks for the response.
The key point of interes...Thanks for the response.<br /><br />The key point of interest for me is that you think that (1) microeconomics is a ready made field of knowledge which one can pick up an study, (2) that macroeconomics is by contrast pseudo-science.<br /><br />I think that left-wing debate should start from a critique of all social science concepts and not from accepting them as a given. I also find the suggestion that macro as opposed to micro economics is pseudo-science rather bizarre since capitalism must be understood as a whole and if you start from the factory and work upwards what you end up with is accounting and not economics. All the basic concepts commodity, value, money, exchange, wages, capital, profit need careful unpicking (as Marx showed) to reveal a very different picture from the one conventionally presented. Also there can be quite different views of micro economics. It might consist of an analytical investigation of the simplest unit of capitalist production (Marx) or as "studies the behaviour of individuals and firms in making decisions regarding the allocation of limited resources" (conventional) which leads in a very different direction.<br /><br />I think that social choice theory, game theory and the like are interesting and have some valuable results but that they do not get to the heart of the matter of analysing key economic concepts.<br /><br />You use terms like "fake macro" as if they had an evident meaning. Are you saying that the ideas of Adam Smith, Ricardo, Marx, Keynes were just pseudoscience?<br /><br />I can make no sense of the suggestion that managed capitalism is "inevitable" AND that a large part of natural resources and means of production should be collectively owned.<br /><br />I can make no sense either of the claim to have deep socialist and deep capitalist sympathies.<br /><br />We are not at a point at which things like this can be said as if they had an evident and clear meaning. We do not yet have a common language and if we think that such a language is readily available by delving into a few current textbooks then I am sure will will never emerge with a sane picture of the world we want to change.<br /><br />A model of the sort of critique of concepts I am talking of was given by Marx in his Introduction to the Critique of Political Economy (not the Preface). Our social thinking has still not got to the point reached by Marx all that time ago.<br /><br />Establishing clear communication is not going to be easy because socialist thought traditions have withered so badly.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02327112409537791809noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-19521569591934877652016-06-15T09:51:53.661+01:002016-06-15T09:51:53.661+01:00Correction:- I am not a "Georgist", more...Correction:- I am not a "Georgist", more of a Geoist, really. Not that the differences are huge.<br /><br />.... ah you mean board policy rather than economic of legislative policy.<br /><br />Perhaps you can move this comment to a seperate thread for economic policy.<br /><br />As for discussion group policy, the __critical thing__ is an optimally prioritised list of functions of a board.<br /><br />And I beleive that since a critical list requires collaborative work and neither this forum nor mine has that function LOOMIO, is the best place to start for that. and then build either this or my board into something which eventually has more of the optimally priortised functions than the loomio site.<br /><br />Please let me know if you disagree, or create a thread that points to this statement as policy, and provides a link to the same policy statement on the loomio board. Which ima gonna create..... done....<br /><br />https://www.loomio.org/d/cHJw9Qi1/which-discussion-group-should-we-use-<br /><br />Follow me over there.<br /><br />I will generate an initial, suboptimally prioritised list of functions we wish to see.<br /><br />I welcome attempts to argue improvements in the prioritisation methods.<br /><br />Steven.<br /><br />Steven.stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3960823575559189442.post-14309576390146578812016-06-15T09:37:49.406+01:002016-06-15T09:37:49.406+01:00Awesome introduction, David.
I suggest you
1) be...Awesome introduction, David.<br /><br />I suggest you<br /><br />1) begin with microeconomics, <br />2) ignore macroeconomics which is frequently propoganda and pseudoscience.<br /><br />Pay huge attention to <br />a) utility theory and<br />b) game theory and<br /><br />c) do not skip on maths. If you do, you'll never grasp the abstract power of anything, let alone economics.<br /><br />Once you grasp microeconomics sufficiently thoroughly, the real macro falls into place in my experience. And the fake macro is exposed.<br /><br />Aggressively managed capitalism looks inevitable once the picture is clear.<br /><br />But, since such aggressive management would involve the popular ownership of monopolies including natural resources, a large part of the means of production in this situation is owned by the people and the workers.<br /><br />Which, while not being strictly socialist, is an approximation to it, and isnt pure capitalism either.<br /><br />This is why i describe myself as a Geoist and Georgist, and have deep socialist sympathies to go alongside my deep capitalist ones.<br /><br />Just my take on things.<br /><br />I do NOT claim to have qualifications in these areas. I do beleive i understand more than others, though. Call me arrogant, call me audacious. I dont care. But analyse my arguments.stevemanc1https://www.blogger.com/profile/15462182984751259360noreply@blogger.com