= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
RomeoStevens comments on Valuable economics knowledge available, ironically, for free - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (37)
If for no other reason, that macro has lots of political implications which winds up being mind killy. Micro OTOH, is instrumentally useful, in that people who understand it generally evade some common errors.
Micro has a lot of political implications as well (minimum wages, regulations, taxes, barriers to entry...)
That there is a danger, though, that people who study micro but don't study macro will end up with a bias that will mislead them, especially in political terms. I know people who took microeconomics 101 and nothing else, and there is a danger there in that people who did that now think they now understand how the whole economy works, but actually don't.
I think the danger of people thinking that they understand how the economy works rises with the amount of economic causes the person takes.
Are they any more wrong than people who study macro and think they understand how the whole economy works? Do these wrong beliefs cash out in actions that negatively impact them? The only thing macro impacts for most people is their conversations with other people about macro.
Not directly. But in a collective tragedy of the commons style way, wrong beliefs about macro ultimately lead to had economic policy which in tern ultimately does negatively impact everyone.