small lebowski

@AndreyFradkin the alchemists

I have a non-economist friend who asked for a general interest book that explains why the Federal Reserve exists and is good. Any suggestions? (It seems that most books about the Federal Reserve are about why it is the cause of the world's problems.)

@petercnordberg @mccrabb_will its on purpose its cool

@mccrabb_will Whoa how did they not catch that in the editing room

@miniapeur quasi-convex is non-convex ☝️🤓

@ndjmsncixmd @Jackbmeyer evolutionary game theory solves this

Getting feedback on my draft

@mosb1000 @m0grady here as i said: macro is only relevant in a broader scope, NOT when it comes to the house prices themselves

@mosb1000 @m0grady Maybe chatgpt helps for you?

Granted ive only taken 3 levels of graduate micro econ, 2 levels of finance, 1 class in urban econ, 1 class in development econ, and 1 phd seminar in housing policy, but i dont remember learning about how inflating the cost of production factors lowers final sale price.

@mosb1000 @m0grady im not and you dont know what youre talking about. you should stop going off your gut feeling and stick to coding.

@mosb1000 @m0grady i have been arguing that macro is not relevant when assessing the effect of LTV on home prices and nothing else

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady Why would you favor an LVT if you do not believe it will increase economic output?

@mosb1000 @m0grady it does make sense. its very simple and clearly you havent taken an education. I am FOR LTV. But its because of confident idiots like you its not serious.

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady This thing where you are asking if fundamental economic principles fall under macro or micro economics makes no sense. But you do have to understand macroeconomics if you’re going to understand how an LVT is supposed to increase overall economic output.

@mosb1000 @m0grady man apparently its too much effort to explain to you

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady Savings are equal to investment. You get more savings, so you get more investment. What are you not understanding here?

@JordanN18975282 @WanderingDutchX @MattJames_22 @daily_romania He literally admitted he is openly racist. what else do you need idiot

@WanderingDutchX @MattJames_22 @daily_romania

Romania's first opponent in the round of 16 will be Sudan...uhh, I mean the Netherlands 🇷🇴🇳🇱

@JDHamkins P=NP?

From a current paper: It is easier to prove that a very hard problem is hard, after all, than it is to prove that a much easier but still hard problem is hard, since the hardness of the easier problem directly implies the hardness of the very hard problem. Can you guess context?

@mosb1000 @m0grady This makes no sense. How does "imposing no burden" imply more productivity?

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady You can see from the other chart you posted that such a tax would impose no burden on economic productivity. So it’s not like you’re just shifting money around, you can actually produce more overall.

@mosb1000 @m0grady In macro savings are equal to investment... They didnt teach u that during python bootcamp?

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady You can shift GDP with a tax on a single good. The idea behind LVT is that by reducing speculation you can increase land availability and reduce costs associated with using land. If people spend some of the money they’ve saved, that will increase GDP.

@mosb1000 @m0grady thats not at all what you said before

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady You absolutely do study tax incidence in macroeconomics. And again, you can’t just ignore basic economic concepts like supply and demand or tax incidence just because you are studying macroeconomics.

@mosb1000 @m0grady heres some very basic micro model for land

@mosb1000 @m0grady this is not a housing market model but this general model class is called microeconomics

@mosb1000 @m0grady we are not. we are talking about the effect of the tax on house prices.

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady We are literally talking about increasing general economic productivity by changing fiscal policy. That is macroeconomics.

@mosb1000 @m0grady the object of study of macro is not markets, it is economic aggregates. this not obscure knowledge.

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady Pretty much any field of economics will study markets. The study of markets is not by any means limited to microeconomics. It doesn’t even make sense to suggest that macroeconomics is not concerned with markets.

@mosb1000 @m0grady this chart is specifically limited to microeconomics. clearly you have not had any econ education because you simply dont know what youre looking at

@bartelomeus12 @m0grady You would study charts like this in pretty much any branch of economics. This is not limited to one specific branch.