which group of people would you say understand economics better?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for samanthademeste
samanthademeste

1553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Poll which group of people would you say understand economics better? (30 votes)

The first one 67%
The second one 33%

-Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes, Ayn Rand, David Ricardo, Fredrich Hayek, Milton Friedman,

-Karl Marx, Fredrick Engels, John Stuart Mill, Pierre Leroux,

 • 
Avatar image for MakeMeaSammitch
MakeMeaSammitch

4889

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By MakeMeaSammitch
Member since 2012 • 4889 Posts

I was going to vote for the first group because it has Adam Smith, but they I saw that it had Ayn Rand, and since I don't have the mindset of a selfish teenager, I voted against her.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#2 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

I voted for the first one since the second had Karl Marx. >_>

Avatar image for samanthademeste
samanthademeste

1553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 samanthademeste
Member since 2010 • 1553 Posts

Adam Smith, John Maynard Keynes and Karl Marx are the "big three" in economics.

Avatar image for Fightingfan
Fightingfan

38011

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Fightingfan
Member since 2010 • 38011 Posts

Ben Bernanke?

Avatar image for famicommander
famicommander

8524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 famicommander
Member since 2008 • 8524 Posts

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b19214ec908b
deactivated-5b19214ec908b

25072

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7 deactivated-5b19214ec908b
Member since 2007 • 25072 Posts

@famicommander said:

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

How did they cause untold damage to the world?

Avatar image for famicommander
famicommander

8524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 famicommander
Member since 2008 • 8524 Posts

@toast_burner said:

@famicommander said:

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

How did they cause untold damage to the world?

By perpetuating economic fallacies which various governments used as justification for their horrible policies. JM Keynes is probably the man with the singe most influence on the economic policies of today's world and his entire General Theory was debunked line-by-line by a man named Henry Hazlitt in his "Failure of the New Economics" decades ago. Keynesian economics is pure bunk.

Marx and Engels were both shredded by Ludwig von Mises over 75 years ago in his masterpiece, "Socialism: an Economic and Sociological Analysis". Marxism isn't even economics, it's a self-contradictory social theory that can only result in misery when implemented.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

178854

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 178854 Posts

I don't like either group.....

Avatar image for theone86
theone86

22669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#10 theone86
Member since 2003 • 22669 Posts

@The-Apostle said:

I voted for the first one since the second had Karl Marx. >_>

"We have proceeded from the presuppositions of political economy"-Karl Marx. In other words, he began by analyzing classical economics, not by simply coming up with his own theory as so many believe. He actually spent a great deal of time in the British Museum reading the original texts of people like Ricardo and Smith. In fact, it's more of a fallacy to group Ricardo and Smith together with Hayek and Friedman against Marx and Engels. Marx, Ricardo, and Smith all derived their economic theories from the labor theory of value, whereas neo-classical economics dismisses it outright.

Avatar image for theone86
theone86

22669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#11 theone86
Member since 2003 • 22669 Posts

@famicommander said:

@toast_burner said:

@famicommander said:

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

How did they cause untold damage to the world?

By perpetuating economic fallacies which various governments used as justification for their horrible policies. JM Keynes is probably the man with the singe most influence on the economic policies of today's world and his entire General Theory was debunked line-by-line by a man named Henry Hazlitt in his "Failure of the New Economics" decades ago. Keynesian economics is pure bunk.

Marx and Engels were both shredded by Ludwig von Mises over 75 years ago in his masterpiece, "Socialism: an Economic and Sociological Analysis". Marxism isn't even economics, it's a self-contradictory social theory that can only result in misery when implemented.

Lawl, Austrian school.

Avatar image for cynical_buzzard
Cynical_Buzzard

226

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#12  Edited By Cynical_Buzzard
Member since 2013 • 226 Posts

I prefer neither groups.

Avatar image for GOGOGOGURT
GOGOGOGURT

4470

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13  Edited By GOGOGOGURT
Member since 2010 • 4470 Posts

My dear fellow, that would be the rich.

Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14  Edited By coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

Why the **** is Ayn Rand on the first list? I mean, disregarding the various disagreements between the other people in the list, she wasn't even an economist, and clearly her books demonstrate that economics as a study wasn't of interest to her whatsoever. Like, otherwise, the first list is pretty handily better.

Avatar image for chessmaster1989
chessmaster1989

30203

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#15  Edited By chessmaster1989
Member since 2008 • 30203 Posts

There are a lot of great economists listed there, and then there's Ayn Rand.

Avatar image for Ace6301
Ace6301

21389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 Ace6301
Member since 2005 • 21389 Posts

I would say the top but then you put Ayn Rand in it. Because of that I think the second has a slight edge.

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35553 Posts

List is odd

Avatar image for Barbariser
Barbariser

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#18  Edited By Barbariser
Member since 2009 • 6785 Posts

The first group excluding Ayn Rand has contributed far more to the field of economics than the bottom list, which is half made out of communists and is therefore disqualified.

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
HoolaHoopMan

14724

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 HoolaHoopMan
Member since 2009 • 14724 Posts

Not quite sure why Ayn Rand is listed.

Avatar image for Lotus-Edge
Lotus-Edge

50513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20  Edited By Lotus-Edge
Member since 2008 • 50513 Posts

@famicommander said:

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

That's probably the point.

Marx, easily.

Avatar image for Jimn_tonic
Jimn_tonic

913

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21  Edited By Jimn_tonic
Member since 2013 • 913 Posts
@famicommander said:

@toast_burner said:

@famicommander said:

Marx, Engels, and John Maynard Keynes were buffoons who have caused untold damage to the world.

Ayn Rand was a novelist and philosopher. I am not very familiar with Leroux.

The rest were actual economists who made real contributions to our understanding of economic theory. Your grouping of them seems arbitrary.

How did they cause untold damage to the world?

By perpetuating economic fallacies which various governments used as justification for their horrible policies. JM Keynes is probably the man with the singe most influence on the economic policies of today's world and his entire General Theory was debunked line-by-line by a man named Henry Hazlitt in his "Failure of the New Economics" decades ago. Keynesian economics is pure bunk.

Marx and Engels were both shredded by Ludwig von Mises over 75 years ago in his masterpiece, "Socialism: an Economic and Sociological Analysis". Marxism isn't even economics, it's a self-contradictory social theory that can only result in misery when implemented.

lot of subjective babble there, commander.

not a single quote from your Austrian idols; just "man a is better than man b"

Avatar image for leviathan91
leviathan91

7763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#22 leviathan91
Member since 2007 • 7763 Posts

John Stuart Mill grouped with Karl Marx? :?

Avatar image for junglist101
junglist101

5517

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23  Edited By junglist101
Member since 2007 • 5517 Posts

What is this some sort of learning thread? I'm out!

Avatar image for samanthademeste
samanthademeste

1553

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By samanthademeste
Member since 2010 • 1553 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

I don't like either group.....

@cynical_buzzard said:

I prefer neither groups.

Then you guys must of hated economics class in school.

Avatar image for themajormayor
themajormayor

25729

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 themajormayor
Member since 2011 • 25729 Posts

Ayn Rand

Avatar image for SUD123456
SUD123456

6953

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 SUD123456
Member since 2007 • 6953 Posts

A more interesting question would be the same question with the choice of answers:

A. The Rich

B. The Middleclass

C. The Poor

Avatar image for Barbariser
Barbariser

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#27 Barbariser
Member since 2009 • 6785 Posts

@SUD123456 said:

A more interesting question would be the same question with the choice of answers:

A. The Rich

B. The Middleclass

C. The Poor

I would suspect that it would be group A. Econs majors earn significantly higher wages than the general population and their income growth rates over the course of their career life are relatively fast compared to those of other majors. So you'd have a disproportionately large number of economists in the upper class.

Avatar image for usagi704
usagi704

2058

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#28 usagi704
Member since 2003 • 2058 Posts

@Barbariser: Financial well-being has nothing to do with understanding something. If anything, it just means they're more adept at gaming the system to their benefit at the expense of others which has been proven thanks to the 2008 crash that we've never managed to crawl out from yet. I expect another crash considering virtually nothing is being done to prevent it from happening again.

Avatar image for Barbariser
Barbariser

6785

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#29 Barbariser
Member since 2009 • 6785 Posts

@usagi704 said:

@Barbariser: Financial well-being has nothing to do with understanding something. If anything, it just means they're more adept at gaming the system to their benefit at the expense of others which has been proven thanks to the 2008 crash that we've never managed to crawl out from yet. I expect another crash considering virtually nothing is being done to prevent it from happening again.

I don't understand how this is even remotely a refutation of what I said.

Avatar image for drekula2
drekula2

3349

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By drekula2
Member since 2012 • 3349 Posts

ayn rand LOL

Avatar image for Laihendi
Laihendi

5872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31  Edited By Laihendi
Member since 2009 • 5872 Posts

The day OT voted Ayn Rand as having a better understanding of something than someone else... I think this place is finally ready.