Cutting the Gordian Knot of GE Theory - Page 3

Onion Eater · 09-17-08, 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentork

What do you propose we do?

Get big government off their backs?

Mentork · 09-17-08, 01:19 AM

How is small government going to help people under the poverty line learn to read?

Metropolis · 09-17-08, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Because employers shouldn't be allowed to take advantage of children.

Nobody, and i do mean nobody, wants to work in unsafe conditions for 14 hours a day, they would only do so if they had to. This goes double for children, the only reason an twelve year old would work in a factory is if his mother and father couldn't support the family on there own.

Furthermore kids should be at school, where is he going to get the time to do this?

You are right. Nobody would want to work. So, that means the company will need to fix up the place and make it so kids WANT to work.

Quote:

Metropolis, your argument that 12-year-olds should be allowed to work in factories "if they want to" is also all wet because they did not want to. Their parents made them work; they beat their children if they came home without a paycheck. Anyway, 12-year-olds aren't of the age of consent - if Mentork was a better debater, he would have slammed you with the "what if a 12-year-old girl 'wants' to work as a prostitute?" argument.

Such a shame. But, no one gets beat now-a-days - So, then, I think it'd be fair to remove the child labor laws.

And, a prostitute? What's wrong with that? It's her body. Her choice.

We are libertarians. We don't care what other people do. As long as it is not hindering our body/life, then we are fine. If little Martha wants to whore herself out, go for it. If little Timmy wants to work in the factory for endless hours, go for it. You're not hurting me. You're not hurting anyone but yourself.

Responsibility should be in the hands of the person - not the government. No one should ever tell me that I should not do something because of 'potential problems'.

Voluntary · 09-17-08, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onion Eater

However, in the meantime, let's get this thread back on topic: Cutting the Gordian Knot of GE Theory.

Adherance to GE Theory practically defines what it means to be a "mainstream" economist today. I'd like to hear from some of those mainstream economists on whether or not I have actually cut the Gordian knot of GE Theory and whether or not they think it was (is) a good idea to do so.

Could you elaborate since I am not completely understanding? Are you attacking the assumptions, as put forth by Blaugh:‘perfectly rational, omniscient, identical consumers; zero transaction costs; complete markets for all time-stated claims for all conceivable contingent events, no trading at disequilibrium prices; no radical, incalculable uncertainty…; only linearly homogenous production functions; no technical progress requiring capital investment, etc’ (Blaug, 1997, p. 5)…

or are you cutting to a deeper level?

One can easily attack the assumptions of GE theory and any decent economist will tell you that you can relax the assumptions.

Voluntary · 09-17-08, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentork

How is small government going to help people under the poverty line learn to read?

Why is this the government's responsibility?

Mentork · 09-17-08, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metropolis

You are right. Nobody would want to work. So, that means the company will need to fix up the place and make it so kids WANT to work.

People will do things they don't want to do to put food on the table. Factory owners should not be allowed to take advantage of basic human needs, much less the needs of children.

Furthermore kids should be at school, where are they going to get the time to do this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metropolis

no one gets beat now-a-days -

You are lying, and even then she could be psychologically abused into doing it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metropolis

And, a prostitute? What's wrong with that? It's her body. Her choice.

What part of she is not of the age of consent don't you get?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metropolis

We are libertarians. We don't care what other people do. As long as it is not hindering our body/life, then we are fine. If little Martha wants to whore herself out, go for it. If little Timmy wants to work in the factory for endless hours, go for it. You're not hurting me. You're not hurting anyone but yourself.

So would it be ok if someone walked into a crowded mall with a gun and blasted his own brains out? He is, after all, not hurting anyone but himself.

Mentork · 09-17-08, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voluntary

Why is this the government's responsibility?

Because if the government doesn't do it then nobody else will.

Voluntary · 09-17-08, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentork

Because if the government doesn't do it then nobody else will.

I am laughing at you.

Onion Eater · 09-17-08, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voluntary

Could you elaborate since I am not completely understanding? Are you attacking the assumptions, as put forth by Blaugh:‘perfectly rational, omniscient, identical consumers; zero transaction costs; complete markets for all time-stated claims for all conceivable contingent events, no trading at disequilibrium prices; no radical, incalculable uncertainty…; only linearly homogenous production functions; no technical progress requiring capital investment, etc’ (Blaug, 1997, p. 5)…

or are you cutting to a deeper level?

One can easily attack the assumptions of GE theory and any decent economist will tell you that you can relax the assumptions.

I am cutting to a deeper level. I am not advocating relaxing the assumptions of GE Theory, I am advocating abandoning it in favor of my own set of axioms, which are listed at the top of my home page.

Read Axiomatic Economics by Victor Aguilar: Simplified Exposition of Axiomatic Economics for a brief overview of my theory. This is a 28-page paper that requires some calculus, though I have simplified one of the axioms to make the paper accessible to people without a background in real analysis.

I also have a short (600-word) excerpt which compares my axiomatic system to that of Debreu and Kolmogorov, Axiomatic Economics by Victor Aguilar: Excerpt about Arrow, Debreu, Keen, Stiglitz and Kolmogorov

Onion Eater · 09-17-08, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mentork

Because if the government doesn't do it [help people under the poverty line learn to read] then nobody else will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voluntary

I am laughing at you.

We are all laughing at you, Mentork. That's absurd.

Has it occurred to you that people might teach their own children to read? Or a group of parents might hire a private tutor? Home-schooled children routinely win the national spelling bee - who taught them to read?

There is such a thing as people taking responsibility for their own welfare and the welfare of their own children. Have you heard of this concept?