Sanders: "You don't need an economics Ph.D to predict the effect of trade deals"

4 years - 60 posts - Latest - RSS
Thread: 117 Goods vs 71 No Goods

Economics Job Market Rumors » Economics » Econ Lounge

Sanders: "You don't need an economics Ph.D to predict the effect of trade deals"

Economist
328a

Am I right in thinking that he's suggesting lowering the minimum wage to $5/day?

That is exactly what it sounds like what he is saying.

If you are referring to the alleged trade bro, PhD, e67b, then you would be right. He would aim for less if he could.

No. Trade bro PhD e67b is not referring to e67b Trade bro, PhD. Trade bro PhD e67d is saying that it sounds like Sanders is actually suggesting that we need to drop the minimum wage to $5 an hour. Naturally I disagree with his comment because I have an economics PhD and know that comments like those are stupid.

Sanders would not agree to a $5 an hour minimum wage.

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
328a

He's right though, economics is not rocket science.

See Venezuela.

You know that there are other countries other than Venezuela, which is in Latin America and corruption is a big problem.

4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
7d77

Technically you do because while you can provide a guess on the direction of the direct effect you need a bit more training to predict the magnitude of the effect and to predict the overall eq effects after you factor in indirect effects.

Not when the lobbyist write the trade deals like they did with NAFTA and TPP.
Then there are the economists who whore themselves and are more concerned about currying favor and their own monetary gain. You can easily get one of these from a HRM school such as Harvard.

Oh I didn't say they needed an econ PhD to make those deals. Any moron can make a deal. But it takes a trained economist to provide the best measure the implications of the deal.

A logical person who has some insight and experience would be able to do this esp if one studied past bad trade deals. It helps not to have drunk the kool-aid, so that you can be more concerned about people and not the corporations who benefit from the trade deals.
When it comes to trade deals, they is a lot of steam rolling without taking the time to help the people who are negatively affected. Why is this? Because the people making the trade deal have no defense other than, "Trade Deal Good! Trade Deal Good!"

You have to be pretty unfamiliar with trade literature to think that economists don't address negative effects, distribution and other impacts from trade deals beyond 'Trade Deal Good!'

4 years ago # QUOTE 4 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
328a

You have to be pretty unfamiliar with trade literature to think that economists don't address negative effects, distribution and other impacts from trade deals beyond 'Trade Deal Good!'

Why did we get the short end when it comes to trade deals then?

4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 8 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

Not when the lobbyist write the trade deals like they did with NAFTA and TPP.
Then there are the economists who whore themselves and are more concerned about currying favor and their own monetary gain. You can easily get one of these from a HRM school such as Harvard.

Oh I didn't say they needed an econ PhD to make those deals. Any moron can make a deal. But it takes a trained economist to provide the best measure the implications of the deal.

A logical person who has some insight and experience would be able to do this esp if one studied past bad trade deals. It helps not to have drunk the kool-aid, so that you can be more concerned about people and not the corporations who benefit from the trade deals.
When it comes to trade deals, they is a lot of steam rolling without taking the time to help the people who are negatively affected. Why is this? Because the people making the trade deal have no defense other than, "Trade Deal Good! Trade Deal Good!"

You don't really understand what I am talking about. You need to do a bit more research before you understand my admittedly extraordinarily elementary comments. Read my comments again, then think for a bit, then step away from the computer and think about them for maybe 12 hours. Then do your research, spend another 12 hours thinking about the whole picture and then come back and post your reply.

4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

That is exactly what it sounds like what he is saying.

If you are referring to the alleged trade bro, PhD, e67b, then you would be right. He would aim for less if he could.

No. Trade bro PhD e67b is not referring to e67b Trade bro, PhD. Trade bro PhD e67d is saying that it sounds like Sanders is actually suggesting that we need to drop the minimum wage to $5 an hour. Naturally I disagree with his comment because I have an economics PhD and know that comments like those are stupid.

Sanders would not agree to a $5 an hour minimum wage.

Well he could suggest a $4.95 minimum wage to undercut those shifty asian pacific countries trying to destroy the american dream.

4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
328a

Not when the lobbyist write the trade deals like they did with NAFTA and TPP.
Then there are the economists who whore themselves and are more concerned about currying favor and their own monetary gain. You can easily get one of these from a HRM school such as Harvard.

Oh I didn't say they needed an econ PhD to make those deals. Any moron can make a deal. But it takes a trained economist to provide the best measure the implications of the deal.

A logical person who has some insight and experience would be able to do this esp if one studied past bad trade deals. It helps not to have drunk the kool-aid, so that you can be more concerned about people and not the corporations who benefit from the trade deals.
When it comes to trade deals, they is a lot of steam rolling without taking the time to help the people who are negatively affected. Why is this? Because the people making the trade deal have no defense other than, "Trade Deal Good! Trade Deal Good!"

You don't really understand what I am talking about. You need to do a bit more research before you understand my admittedly extraordinarily elementary comments. Read my comments again, then think for a bit, then step away from the computer and think about them for maybe 12 hours. Then do your research, spend another 12 hours thinking about the whole picture and then come back and post your reply.

Keep thinking you are smart if it makes you happy, O Drinker of the Kool-Aid.

4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 3 No Jab !
Economist
7936

NO economist predicted the massive income and wealth inequality that would happen between labor and capital from free trade.

4 years ago # QUOTE 3 Jab 5 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

He's right though, economics is not rocket science.

See Venezuela.

You know that there are other countries other than Venezuela, which is in Latin America and corruption is a big problem.

LOL, sorry, I forgot. At this hour Venezuela has already shut down it powergrid and and so you cannot go see them.

I amend my statement to:

See Venezuela tomorrow or tuesday from 9am to 5pm when they have their power grid on.

4 years ago # QUOTE 6 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
7936

Do any of you guys think that the "Catch Up Hypothesis" would be possible without being on the backs of American workers?

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
328a

He's right though, economics is not rocket science.

See Venezuela.

You know that there are other countries other than Venezuela, which is in Latin America and corruption is a big problem.

LOL, sorry, I forgot. At this hour Venezuela has already shut down it powergrid and and so you cannot go see them.
I amend my statement to:
See Venezuela tomorrow or tuesday from 9am to 5pm when they have their power grid on.

So, why is it that you cannot research other countries other than Venezuela?

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 3 No Jab !
Economist
7936

Am I right in thinking that he's suggesting lowering the minimum wage to $5/day?

Are you feigning density?

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 2 No Jab !
Economist
328a

NO economist predicted the massive income and wealth inequality that would happen between labor and capital from free trade.

The labor unions and the anti-trade politicians did but no one listened to them.

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 4 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

You have to be pretty unfamiliar with trade literature to think that economists don't address negative effects, distribution and other impacts from trade deals beyond 'Trade Deal Good!'

Why did we get the short end when it comes to trade deals then?

Because most countries of the pacific deal are asian and people in asia are shorter. In the Atlantic deal that Obama is also trying to wrap up before December there are tall nordic and german people involved so there we get the tall end. Its unfortunate that different cultures have different genetics and different height this is what we have to play with so just play with what you can play.

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
7936

This is the territory of political economy.

All macro economists who didn't see the differing effects of free trade on capital and labor needs to just accept that this is the arena of political economy.

4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 2 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

Oh I didn't say they needed an econ PhD to make those deals. Any moron can make a deal. But it takes a trained economist to provide the best measure the implications of the deal.

A logical person who has some insight and experience would be able to do this esp if one studied past bad trade deals. It helps not to have drunk the kool-aid, so that you can be more concerned about people and not the corporations who benefit from the trade deals.
When it comes to trade deals, they is a lot of steam rolling without taking the time to help the people who are negatively affected. Why is this? Because the people making the trade deal have no defense other than, "Trade Deal Good! Trade Deal Good!"

You don't really understand what I am talking about. You need to do a bit more research before you understand my admittedly extraordinarily elementary comments. Read my comments again, then think for a bit, then step away from the computer and think about them for maybe 12 hours. Then do your research, spend another 12 hours thinking about the whole picture and then come back and post your reply.

Keep thinking you are smart if it makes you happy, O Drinker of the Kool-Aid.

I never made any comment on who is smarter. I simply said that you did not understand and that your misunderstanding stems from you ill preparation and from the fact that you have not really deeply thought about this issue in your entire lifetime.

4 years ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

See Venezuela.

You know that there are other countries other than Venezuela, which is in Latin America and corruption is a big problem.

LOL, sorry, I forgot. At this hour Venezuela has already shut down it powergrid and and so you cannot go see them.
I amend my statement to:
See Venezuela tomorrow or tuesday from 9am to 5pm when they have their power grid on.

So, why is it that you cannot research other countries other than Venezuela?

Because they are best example for you right now. But if you don't like Venezuela then might I suggest that you go look at North Korea. at this hour the sun should be up around there so you can see them very well at this hour.

4 years ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
6338

Stop feeding the ungread.

A logical person who has some insight and experience would be able to do this esp if one studied past bad trade deals. It helps not to have drunk the kool-aid, so that you can be more concerned about people and not the corporations who benefit from the trade deals.
When it comes to trade deals, they is a lot of steam rolling without taking the time to help the people who are negatively affected. Why is this? Because the people making the trade deal have no defense other than, "Trade Deal Good! Trade Deal Good!"

You don't really understand what I am talking about. You need to do a bit more research before you understand my admittedly extraordinarily elementary comments. Read my comments again, then think for a bit, then step away from the computer and think about them for maybe 12 hours. Then do your research, spend another 12 hours thinking about the whole picture and then come back and post your reply.

Keep thinking you are smart if it makes you happy, O Drinker of the Kool-Aid.

I never made any comment on who is smarter. I simply said that you did not understand and that your misunderstanding stems from you ill preparation and from the fact that you have not really deeply thought about this issue in your entire lifetime.

4 years ago # QUOTE 3 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
7936

NO economist predicted the massive income and wealth inequality that would happen between labor and capital from free trade.

The labor unions and the anti-trade politicians did but no one listened to them.

http://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cb9xQbDW0AItRoG.png

Look at the global trade as % of global GDP. After a certain point, labor's wages in a developed country will certainly decline.

Trade economists do not go into the arena of labor economists. In this sense, a jack of all trades, aka political economist would have been a better academic to go with.

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 2 No Jab !
Economist
e67b

Stop feeding the ungread.

Noooooooo. Please. I'm bored. Plus he is not an undergrad. He sounds someone with high school level education.

4 years ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

« Previous 123 Next »

Recently Announced

Upcoming

Economics

Job Market

Off Topic

Job Market Wiki

Job Market Candidates

Updates

Sanders: "You don't need an economics Ph.D to predict the effect of trade deals"

Reply »