HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (T. Scott Thompson)
Subject: Re: Problems with Neo-Classical Economics
Reply-To: thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
Organization: Economics Department, University of Minnesota
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 23:02:23 GMT

garry@monarch.eng.ufl.edu (Garry Peterson) writes:

>re: problems with neo-classical economics
>Being the assumptions of:
>perfect information, perfect rationality, and non-valuable externalities.

>My claim is that neo-classical economics leads to one to incorrect
>conclusions, because the assumptions it is based upon are false.

False assumptions do not necessarily lead to incorrect conclusions.
What conclusions do you believe to be false, and what is the basis for
your claim?  There is no point in simply arguing whether or not
information is perfect, behavior rational, or externalities
non-existant.  No reasonable person believes that the assumptions of
the idealized neoclassical world are literally true.
--
T. Scott Thompson              email:  thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
Department of Economics        phone:  (612) 625-0119
University of Minnesota        fax:    (612) 624-0209
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: pkbockus@gsbphd.uchicago.edu (Keith Bockus)
Subject: Re: Problems with Neo-Classical Economics
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 15:21:43 GMT

garry@monarch.eng.ufl.edu (Garry Peterson) writes:


>A topic for discussion
>**********************

>The problems with neo-classical economics

>(1)  Perfect Rationality.  People are not perfectly rational.  Perhaps in 
>simple situations, but definitely not in complex ones.

>(2)  Perfect Information.  All people do not have access to all 
>information.  Again, in simple situations this approximation may be 
>valid, but most situations are not simple.

[...stuff deleted...]

>Here is one topic relating to these points which I think is interesting.
>-To me this looks like three reasons why free trade is not necessarily 
>a good thing.

>Comments anyone?

I don't see these at all as arguing against free trade.
You seem to suggest that market participants labor under
certain constraints not discussed in Econ 101, but that
gov't bureaucracies are somehow immune.

1) Perfect Rationality - Are you willing to assume that 
   gov't bureaucrats are more rational than market participants?
   They certainly do not suffer the consequences of their 
   decisions as market participants would.  Indeed, they
   tend to labor under incentives to reward special interests
   rather than to increase welfare (whatever welfare is...).

2) Imperfect info - Even if you believe that bureaucrats are more rational 
   than the average market participant, you pretty much have to agree
   that a gov't decision has only a tiny fraction of the information
   to which markets respond.  One of the appealing aspects of market
   transactions is that they reveal and aggregate preferences, private
   information, etc.  Bureaucracies labor in relative ignorance.


>Garry Peterson
>Arthur Marshall Lab, University of Florida
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker)
Subject: Economic statistics on-line
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 00:25:14 GMT

Is there any way to get official economic statistics using anonymous ftp?
Right now, I would like inflation figures for as many currencies as
possible (for as far back as possible) as well as exchange rates.  I might
need other statistics later.

(If you answer this message more than a week after it was posted, please
email to me also, as I don't know how long I will read this group.
Thanks!)


Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Subject: Env. Satellites Shutdown Dec. 1992
Keywords: satellites, debt
Reply-To: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov (Michael W. Rowland)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681  USA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:55:49 GMT

  We at Langley Research Center received news on Thursday, October 2,
1992 that NASA intends to shutdown the following satellites in
December to save about $15M:

     NUMBUS-7

     ERBS

     NOAA-9

     NOAA-10

The following experiments will not be operational while
the satellites are shutdown:

     Stratospheric Aerosol Measurement II  (SAM II)

     Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBS) (3)

     Stratospheric Aerosol and Gas Experiment II (SAGE II)

There were no plans stated to restart the satellites at a
later date.

Also UARS (Upper Atmosphere Research Satellite) may go after its
18 months are completed!

Mike Rowland

Mike Rowland, Aerosol Research Branch, MS 475
NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton VA 23681
internet: rowland@zorba7.larc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu (T. Scott Thompson)
Subject: Re: Pareto optimality highly overrated (was Re: Competition and Welfare: an anecdote)
Keywords: Welfare theorem, perfect competition
Reply-To: thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
Organization: Economics Department, University of Minnesota
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 17:56:42 GMT

asp+@cs.cmu.edu (James Aspnes) writes:

>In article <thompson.716663945@daphne.socsci.umn.edu> thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu writes:
>>...As background we had been discussing
>>the two "Fundamental Theorems" of welfare economics, which basically
>>say (1) Every competitive equilibrium is Pareto optimal; and (2) Every
>>Pareto optimal allocation of resources can be achieved as a
>>competitive equilibrium given some initial allocation of resources.
>>[followed by story of academic economists ignoring them]

>Unfortunately, Pareto optimality is not a very useful goal all by
>itself.  For example, if I steal your car, and you can't afford to buy

I agree.  Pareto optimality isn't a very strong criteria.  In
particular, unless there are efficient mechanisms for redistributing
wealth one cannot even conclude that a society should necessarily
choose a Pareto optimal allocation over a Pareto dominated one.  (This
is one of those conditions that makes theorists somewhat skeptical in
practice about the usefulness of the welfare theorems.)

However, Pareto optimality does have the virtue of being essentially
value-free.  (i.e. situation A dominates situation B if and only if
all members of society unanimously agree that A is no worse than B.)
All other criteria that I have seen involve (implicit or explicit)
value judgements about what kinds of distribution of wealth are good
or bad.  It is my position that it is not appropriate for economics to
choose one value system over another in work that is supposed to be
purely "scientific."

I do not mean to suggest that the ideal economist does not have
values, nor that his/her research is not properly guided by values.
However, s/he should be clear about which conclusions follow from
these value judgements and which do not.  Pareto optimality is about
as value-free a criteria as you are likely to find for comparing
economic systems/policies.

>An implicit assumption in arguments based on welfare economics is that
>we actually care about the welfare of all participants.  However, it

Arrow's impossibility theorem tells us that no perfect social choice
mechanisms exist.  Any real social system must at least some of the
time make decisions that are not unanimously supported.  It is
impossible to separate welfare economics from study of political
institutions in this regard.
--
T. Scott Thompson              email:  thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu
Department of Economics        phone:  (612) 625-0119
University of Minnesota        fax:    (612) 624-0209
From: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Vote for 3rd party/no-party candidates!!!
Date: 5 Oct 92 05:27:24 GMT
Reply-To: ae547@yfn.ysu.edu (Ronda Hauben)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH


In a previous article, markts@mcl.ucsb.edu (Mark T. Schmidt) says:

>
>
>   Clinton? I saw three speaches by Bill in the last 4 days. I think his
>   strategy is promise the world to everyone. --> Health care for 

BUT Clinton leaves out WHO produces the WEALTH i.e. the worker

Clinton has no program for shortening hours of work and raising
wages,
 giving workers more say in their unions so they can deal
  with the trade union officials who act like overlords 

So Clinton has NOTHING to offer the largest portion of the population
 the workers
>
>   Bush? He comes from a different, yet still wicked angle.  He thinks 
>   that the FED is the solution to every problem, including international
>   problems. He thinks he can attain the New World Order by funding the
>   World Bank and getting all countries under one currency (and eventually

BUSH is continuing the economic program of the Reagan years - 
EVERYTHING for the monopoly corporations who are holding back production
to get high prices.

Supporting them attacks the WEALTH of the nation and so the country
is continually poorer.

>
>  I [may] not agree with a word you say, 
>  but I will defend to the death your    
>  right to say it.                       
>                     - Voltaire         

Voltaire's Program is the key to an economic program that will help
deal with the problems.

It was the priniciple that guided the SEARCHLIGHT the local union
newspaper of the Flint Sit Down strikers and the other union pioneers
in Flint -

They had an uncensored press in which they criticized their trade
union leaders and they had a shop news section which provided real
information about what was happening on the shop floor.

The newspaper was uncensored from 1942 when it started (50 years ago)
until the International Union censored it in 1951.

In their newspaper they explained why higher wages DOESN'T lead
to inflation but leads to better conditions for workers and for the
whole country.

They criticized the lean, mean management philosophy which
GM was trying to impose in 1946-8

When workers had a VOICE the terrible economic problems of 1946-8
which were severe problems like now - could be solved.

They were the people that saw what was really going on on the 
shop floor of the largest factories and they told the world
and they clarified that the problem was that there was
MODERN TECHNOLOGY so it was possible to go forward but there was
BACKWARD MANAGEMENT which meant that there was always something trying
to pull things backwards.

So its good to see Voltaire's Quote again - it is the path to an
economic program that will deal with the real problems.
                   Ronda

>
>
-- 
Ronda Hauben                    email address:ae547@yfn.ysu.edu
Amateur Computerist Newsletter              or
P.O. Box 4344                   rhauben@heartland.bradley.edu
Dearborn, MI 48126
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 01:41:06 -0400 
From: Thomas Omar Smith <ts2a+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Currency systems
	<1992Sep29.005704.21986@ole.cdac.com>

Excerpts from netnews.sci.econ: 29-Sep-92 Re: Currency systems The D.
Reincarnate@ole.c (567)

> In article <lcc37qINN3d@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM
> writes:
> >In article 21728@samba.oit.unc.edu, Robert.Vienneau@bbs.oit.unc.edu
> (Robert Vienneau) >On the other hand, the American economist Irving
> Fischer proposed tying
> >>the monetary unit to a basket of commodities. I know nothing about the
> >>practical details of his scheme.
> >I've never read this before. It's kind of an intriguing idea. Do you have
> >more details? Why did you not like it as an idea?

>   Would the basket of commodities include, say "A Big Mac"? :-)

>   -S
>   ssave@ole.cdac.com


And what are the economic implications if someone eats that Big Mac :)

					Tom the non hacker
					Kemp in 96!
					"If patriotism is the last refuge
					of scoundrels,  Then environmentalism
					is the current refuge of totalitarians."
					Bob Jackson
Xref: sparky sci.econ:7899 talk.politics.misc:48882
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: "Liberal" History Rewrite
From: demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man)
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:26:24 EST
Followup-To: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
 <1992Sep19.051304.23917@midway.uchicago.edu> <1379@tecsun1.etl.army.mil>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Demonic Possesions, Inc.

In article <1379@tecsun1.etl.army.mil>, riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs) writes:
> In article <1992Sep19.051304.23917@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Sep18.060011.13106@Princeton.EDU> niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
>>>In <ATAYLOR.92Sep17184811@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
>>>
>>>[Lots deleted]
>>>
>>>>	Applause. Anderson has it right; what next, acknowledgement
>>>>	that the Laffer Curve is an accurate model?
>>>
>>>Very few people have ever argued that the Laffer Curve is inaccurate.
>>>They have simply denied the ridiculous and unproven assumption about our
>>>economy's current place on the Laffer Curve.
>>>
>>>The Laffer Curve simply says that there is a point at which raising
>>>taxes will no longer raise revenues, and that cutting taxes will.
>>>It doesn't provide any evidence as to which side of that point we are at,
>>>and thus doesn't prove anything about the effect on revenue of raising taxes.
>>
>>Don't forget that Laffer's endorsed Clinton for president, folks...
> 
> 	Too right, Ted. Once a wimp conservative, always a wimp
> conservative. (My apologies to Pat McGuinness, who has been trying to

	Wimp conservative?

	Not trusting Bush makes one a wimp??

> convert me to the dark, er, ah, supply side of the Force - sorry, Pat, I'm 
> not a believer yet :)

	You will be...:)

Brett                                                      
_______________________________________________________________________________
Proconsul Computer Consulting                                        CHA-CHING!
Better, Cheaper, Faster					       (Pick any two :)
Disclaimer:								   NOT!
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.theory
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Subject: Re: Economic Discrimination was Outgrowing Libertarianism...
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 18:09:33 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

Instead of a Phil. 101 number on "Does Free Will Exist?", I'd
like to see some discussion on to what extent one is free to
make moral judgments in what we usually think of as human
society.  It's _possible_ that Brian Yoder would autonomously
reject racism in the midst of a thoroughly racist society,
but it's extremely unlikely.  Moreover, even if he did reject
it in thought, he might consent to be a part of a community
which practiced it; he might not have a lot of choice.  I
think that was the original idea of mentioning "conditioning"
which seems to have been an unfortunate choice of words.
Brian, what about the powerful effects of social pressure
on all of us, and even when we resist them, what about the
many, the majority, who do not?
-- 
 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: alan@highlite.uucp (Alan McConnell)
Subject: Andre Marrou in Debates??
Organization: Gotham Communications Research
Distribution: sci.econ
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 14:30:40 GMT

I apologize if this post is off-topic, but I know of no other way to
access great numbers of libertarians.  I am not one, but I am pro-demo-
cracy.  I am hoping to get information, and perhaps to stimulate action,
about including the Libertarian candidate in any "presidential debates"
that include Ross Perot.  Or can anyone tell me why Clinton, Bush and
Perot should debate, but the Libertarian candidate be excluded?
Alan McConnell

-- 
Alan McConnell             "What wondrous life is this I lead!
Pixel Analysis              Ripe apples drop about my head . ."
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: pwg1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Paul W. Grimes)
Subject: Re: Economic statistics on-line
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 20:39:33 GMT

baker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Andrew Baker) writes:

>Is there any way to get official economic statistics using anonymous ftp?
>Right now, I would like inflation figures for as many currencies as
>possible (for as far back as possible) as well as exchange rates.  I might
>need other statistics later.

>(If you answer this message more than a week after it was posted, please
>email to me also, as I don't know how long I will read this group.
>Thanks!)

Don't know about FTP sources.  Why don't you try this bulletin board -->

Export-Import Bank of the US  OPEN BOARD   202-566-4602

Good Luck

--
Paul W. Grimes, Ph.D.			Voice:    (601)325-1987
Associate Professor of Economics	FAX:      (601)325-2410
College of Business & Industry		Internet: pwg1@Ra.MsState.Edu
Mississippi State University 		Bitnet:   pwg1@MsState.Bitnet		
Xref: sparky sci.econ:7847 talk.politics.theory:4378
From: binlee@vtcc1.cc.vt.edu (L. D. ROPER)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Maths Model in Finance
Date: 6 Oct 92 22:03:00 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Hi,all your guys:

   I am a graduate in EE department and will get my master degree next May,
after that I want to study for Ph.D program in department of finance in
some good university.I am particularly interested in application of 
stochastic differential equation in finance models,like black-scholes
option pricing model.

   Can anyone give me any suggestion about,which university are doing some
research in above area?

    Please send your helpful reply to me by email.

    B.Lee    
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.theory
From: nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson)
Subject: Re: What happens when USA goes bust?
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 22:17:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA

In article <1992Sep27.051145.1277@oracle.us.oracle.com> kwee@oracle.uucp (Karl Wee) writes:
>When the confidence of investors in the goodwill of the US government breaks,
>it will be precipitous.  Current statistical and economic models will no
>longer be useful since they are based on certain assumptions which will no
>longer hold, like the power of government and certain social and economic
>fabrics which will be broken when people get into panic mode.
>
>For example, I will not want to buy government bonds.  Pretty soon it will be
>any bonds, for fear of inflation.  Pretty soon people will know that even
>cash is worthless, since the only way out for the government is inflation.
>There will be panic buying --> hyperinflation.  Living standards will plummet
>to subsistance level.  If the government doesn't take drastic steps to enforce
>property rights, (and I don't think that will be possible at all without
>removing most of the current due process) there'll be a break down of
>law and order, and even the things I buy won't be mine....

   There are many ways things can go wrong.  This is one of them but
   a 1930's style depression is another, a totalitarian regime is yet
   another.  The proper coping mechanism and means to be prepared vary
   with each one of these, and often are opposite each other; for instance
   cash is good in depression, and debt is bad, whereas gold is somewhat
   useless.  But in hyperinflation gold is good, cash is bad, and fixed
   rate debt is good.

   One scenario I have seen few people mention is high, but not hyper,
   inflation.  Plenty of nations have survived a decade or so of inflation
   in the 7-11% range.   They pay off their national debts in cheaper
   currency, the economy stays hotted up so unemploymenty doesn't get
   too high.   Of course some people get screwed, but the point is that
   there's plenty of recent historical precedent for this and it's not
   the total disaster that depressions and hyperinflations are.


>Vote for Ross Perot at least as a protest

   Ross wants to raise my taxes.  So I'm not voting for him.


---peter
From: chesley@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Duncan Chesley)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Dept of Commerce Matrix
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:07:42 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University Computing Services


I have heard that the U.S. Department of Commerce uses a large (400x400 or
1000x1000) matrix and its inverse to describe the U.S. economy.  Does anyone
have an ASCII file with the coefficients in it?  Or can someone direct me
to a place where I can get a machine-readable copy? Thanks in advance.
--
 Duncan Chesley                    University Computing Services
chesley@ucs.umass.edu              Lederle GRC
Ph.  (413) 545-3032                University of Massachusetts
FAX: (413) 545-3203                Amherst, MA  01003
From: kim_sh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Sung Hyun Kim)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Problems with Neo-Classical Economics
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:33:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: jhunix.1992Sep29.173351.15380
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore

In article <thompson.717719660@hermes.socsci.umn.edu> thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu writes:
>garry@monarch.eng.ufl.edu (Garry Peterson) writes:
>
>>The problems with neo-classical economics
>
>>(1)  Perfect Rationality.  People are not perfectly rational.  Perhaps in 
>>simple situations, but definitely not in complex ones.
> [.....]
>
>1.  It is possible to show that some conclusions of neoclassical
>equilibrium theory do not require rational behavior.  Other
>conclusions stand essentially unchanged under minor deviations from
>rationality.  George Akerlof has written papers showing how small
>deviations from rationality generate only second order small
>deviations in observed aggregate equilibrium outcomes.  Other
>conclusions are possible depending on the model.
>

Even though I agree with overall arguments of Mr.Thompson, I should disagree
with the example he chose.  I think George Akerlof's point was that the small
deviations (which is second order to the individuals) can cause the first
order deviations in aggregate behavior.

>T. Scott Thompson              email:  thompson@atlas.socsci.umn.edu


-- 
     Sung Hyun Kim   kim_sh@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu, kim_sh@jhuvms.hcf.jhu.edu
 Mathematicians don't think mathematical economists are mathematicians.
 Economists don't think mathematicical economists are economists.
 Mathematical economists think they are mathematical economists.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: jackson@kaos.stsci.edu (Bob Jackson)
Subject: Re: Racism in America
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
	<53712@dime.cs.umass.edu> <1992Sep26.170822.28032@samba.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:05:30 GMT

w.r.t.

Too bad, they say, there just
weren't a lot of powerful folks in any constituency which could defend
the rights and interests of Native Americans (this is a great test case
which shows the failure of Libertarianism in a racist country).

The history of the Native Americans shows what happens when the
government does not enforce land ownership and instead chooses to
redistribute land to politically more powerful groups.

The process inflicted on Native Americans has more in common with
Democratic Socialism (everything is up for the vote, and unpopular
minorities lose elections) than with Libertarianism.
Newsgroups: sci.econ