CronoDAS comments on How to debate when authority is questioned, but really not needed? - Less Wrong

3 Post author: DonaldMcIntyre 23 February 2015 01:44AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (41)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: CronoDAS 23 February 2015 07:36:24AM *  0 points [-]

[missing the point]

Me: I think money printing by the Fed will cause inflation if they continue like this.

Not as long as interest rates remain at or near zero. The economy is in a weird place right now. Normally, people who have money but don't want to spend it immediately will lend it in order to receive interest. However, with interest rates so low, people who would normally be lending money - including banks - have little incentive to do so. Money is ending up under Apple Computer's proverbial mattress instead of being spent on things. Making things worse is that the Fed's normal method of "printing" money - giving people cash in exchange for short-term Treasury bills (which are currently paying near-zero interest) - only puts money in the hands of people who aren't going to be spending or lending their cash, and money not spent doesn't cause inflation. (If they wanted to spend or lend the money, they would have sold their T-bills to someone by now.)

Paul Krugman says it better than I can.

Comment author: DonaldMcIntyre 23 February 2015 06:37:23PM 0 points [-]

This is an example of refuting my argument by actually arguing about it instead of discrediting me because I am not an economist.

My problem is when instead of your answer above you write "are you an economist? have you investigated this?" with the obvious objective of coming after my answer with an "ok, so your premise is false because you don't know what you are talking about".

Comment author: CronoDAS 24 February 2015 12:26:10AM 2 points [-]

This is an example of refuting my argument by actually arguing about it instead of discrediting me because I am not an economist.

Yeah, hence the [missing the point] label... ;)

My problem is when instead of your answer above you write "are you an economist? have you investigated this?" with the obvious objective of coming after my answer with an "ok, so your premise is false because you don't know what you are talking about".

Yeah. That's a pain in the neck.

Silly counter-rebuttal:

"Well, are you an economist?"

Not-so-silly counter-rebuttals:

No, but this is Econ 101 stuff you can look up on Wikipedia or whatever.
No, but that's what Famous Economist wrote. Here, go look at his stuff. (link)
No, so I might be confused about something. Can you explain where I went wrong?

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 24 February 2015 11:10:30AM 1 point [-]

Is that really the obvious objective? Maybe they are saying you should research the topic. "Printing money" is a red flag phrase, like discussing evolution in terms of your grandfather being a monkey.