How Neoliberal Economists have Cost You Money and Wealth

[Nakosis]

Not always. People did riot against it, unions have formed, but many people take a job or they don't eat or feed their family.

Right, all in the name of self interest. We should encourage, support economics in the spirit of self interest.

Probably because "success" is not defined the same to everyone. I'm not a success with capitalism, but for my struggles and having came from nothing and no support I've been pretty successful in getting things and achieving goals. Who's success do we teach?

We teach to our own level of success. I'm sure you have a lot to teach. However one can't teach beyond their own successes. I wish I could. I'd like to teach my kids to succeed beyond my own success.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Who's success though? Is success finding love and making lots of friends? Is it acquiring vast wealth? Is it getting your art to an audience? Is it achieving the goals you make in life?

 

[Revoltingest]

I think I've expressed quite a few of my own thought, perhaps you haven't noticed.

OTOH, I see no problem using and repeating good ideas. Kind of silly don't you think to condense my posts to a one liner to criticize.

Genuinely new ideas are quite rare, eg, General Relativity.
In matters of human experience, the odds are overwhelming
that whatever dawns upon us has previously occurred to
someone else too....& they've expressed it somewhere.

(Btw, it's hard to type when a cat is licking one's hand.
And I know that I'm not the first to endure such a disturbance.)

As you so correctly point out, what matters is cogent reasoning
from cromulent premises, regardless of their origins. I notice
that your critics offer nothing original either....which is perfectly
fine, other than the glass houses & thrown rocks problem.

The field of economics has endured periods of allowing theory
to supersede empiricism, eg, the fashion of optimization modelling
(which didn't adequately address real world human behavior)
based upon the mythical "homo economicus".
As long as our theories are tested in the real world, we should be
OK, regardless of what school of economic thought one prefers.

Caution!
I know that the above is just un-thinking regurgitated plagiarism.
But I don't know whom to cite. Please forgive this inadequacy.

 

[Nakosis]

Who's success though? Is success finding love and making lots of friends? Is it acquiring vast wealth? Is it getting your art to an audience? Is it achieving the goals you make in life?

Your success. Wherever you've been successful. Passed on often by parent to child, or even culturally. Again, unfortunately, public education, not so much.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Your success. Wherever you've been successful. Passed on often by parent to child, or even culturally. Again, unfortunately, public education, not so much.

Public education can't teach everyone's model and image of success. Parents can't always teach it either. "Your success" could be life as a nun or missionary, investment banker or artist, doctor or hippy.

 

[Nakosis]

Genuinely new ideas are quite rare, eg, General Relativity.
In matters of human experience, the odds are overwhelming
that whatever dawns upon us has previously occurred to
someone else too....& they've expressed it somewhere.

(Btw, it's hard to type when a cat is licking one's hand.
And I know that I'm not the first to endure such a disturbance.)

As you so correctly point out, what matters is cogent reasoning
from cromulent premises, regardless of their origins. I notice
that your critics offer nothing original either....which is perfectly
fine, other than the glass houses & thrown rocks problem.

The field of economics has endured periods of allowing theory
to supersede empiricism, eg, the fashion of optimization modelling
(which didn't adequately address real world human behavior)
based upon the mythical "homo economicus".
As long as our theories are tested in the real world, we should be
OK, regardless of what school of economic thought one prefers.

Caution!
I know that the above is just un-thinking regurgitated plagiarism.
But I don't know whom to cite. Please forgive this inadequacy.

Actually I admit it was cliche. However as you point out the the OP is a matter of repeating a set of ideas.

Still if if someone can only find one cliche statement out of everything I've posted to criticize, I think I'm doing pretty good.

 

[Revoltingest]

Public education can't teach everyone's model and image of success. Parents can't always teach it either. "Your success" could be life as a nun or missionary, investment banker or artist, doctor or hippy.

Somewhat different from your theme.....a friend & I were discussing
common problems that kids encounter in the real world upon graduation
from high school & college. It turns out that they often have no clue about
apartment rental agreements, home financing, car maintenance, & other
practical matters which could really bit them in the behind. It seems that
schools could do a better job preparing kids for life.

 

[Revoltingest]

Actually I admit it was cliche. However as you point out the the OP is a matter of repeating a set of ideas.

Still if if someone can only find one cliche statement out of everything I've posted to criticize, I think I'm doing pretty good.

Well, you are smarter than the average mare.
(Change'n up the cliche to avoid offending @Wu Wei.)

 

[Nakosis]

Public education can't teach everyone's model and image of success. Parents can't always teach it either. "Your success" could be life as a nun or missionary, investment banker or artist, doctor or hippy.

Not saying one can't succeed on their own. Obviously possible. Just a lot harder without someone to mentor you. The likelihood of success increases greatly by learning from someone already successful.

Sure a nun learns how to be a nun from other nuns.

Artistry is the same really. Lot easier to learn art from the successful. Rare for great artists who are self taught. Those are really the gems or pearls.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Somewhat different from your theme.....a friend & I were discussing
common problems that kids encounter in the real world upon graduation
from high school & college. It turns out that they often have no clue about
apartment rental agreements, home financing, car maintenance, & other
practical matters which could really bit them in the behind. It seems that
schools could do a better job preparing kids for life.

That doesn't address the question of who's success are we teaching? Some would say schools shouldn't teach auto maintenance and repairs because that takes money and business away from mechanics.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Not saying one can't succeed on their own. Obviously possible. Just a lot harder without someone to mentor you. The likelihood of success increases greatly by learning from someone already successful.

Sure a nun learns how to be a nun from other nuns.

Artistry is the same really. Lot easier to learn art from the successful. Rare for great artists who are self taught. Those are really the gems or pearls.

That doesn't address "who's definition and approach of success" that schools should teach.

 

[Revoltingest]

That doesn't address the question of who's success are we teaching?

That would be the result of consensus.
But I'd like it to address more of the practical aspects of living.

Some would say schools shouldn't teach auto maintenance and repairs because that takes money and business away from mechanics.

Meh....some people will say anything.
As McCoy would say....
"What the Klingon has said is unimportant, and we do not hear his words."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That would be the result of consensus.
But I'd like it to address more of the practical aspects of living.

That I do agree with. Success is too broad of a term for a school to bother with teaching as a point, but such practical living skills should be taught, along with civics, basic law, and other things people need. Even social skills of various points because Aspies aren't the only ones who struggle with various aspects of being a social critter.

Meh....some people will say anything.
As McCoy would say....
"What the Klingon has said is unimportant

But yet it has been said, the claim made, and it needs addressed. And it is valid to say every repair and maintenance thing people do with their car, on their own, that's less business for those who make a living doing those things.

 

[Revoltingest]

That I do agree with. Success is too broad of a term for a school to bother with teaching as a point, but such practical living skills should be taught, along with civics, basic law, and other things people need. Even social skills of various points because Aspies aren't the only ones who struggle with various aspects of being a social critter.

But yet it has been said, the claim made, and it needs addressed. And it is valid to say every repair and maintenance thing people do with their car, on their own, that's less business for those who make a living doing those things.

Ideally, schools should tailor a program to the kid's needs.
Not college bound? Then offer'm more practical courses.
Interested in a trade? Teach'm practical math with applications.
These are big failings I see.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Right, all in the name of self interest. We should encourage, support economics in the spirit of self interest.

That's pretty much why this OP exist. We do culturally teach and promote self interest to various degrees. With religion, we encourage people to do what feels right to them. In defining ourselves to others, we encourage people to be themselves. We do promote a Nietzsches-light approach to self interests. What we don't think about, teach, or consider is we must weigh our self interests against the rights, health, and well-being of others. The self interests of one could be the devastation and sickness and death of a community. It could be to use people as pawns in advancing self interests. We aren't so very good at teaching your rights end where your neighbors nose begins. Social responsibility is also neglected, as we are social animals, and can't do it on our own because we need and depend on other people.

 

[Nakosis]

That's pretty much why this OP exist. We do culturally teach and promote self interest to various degrees. With religion, we encourage people to do what feels right to them. In defining ourselves to others, we encourage people to be themselves. We do promote a Nietzsches-light approach to self interests. What we don't think about, teach, or consider is we must weigh our self interests against the rights, health, and well-being of others. The self interests of one could be the devastation and sickness and death of a community. It could be to use people as pawns in advancing self interests. We aren't so very good at teaching your rights end where your neighbors nose begins. Social responsibility is also neglected, as we are social animals, and can't do it on our own because we need and depend on other people.

Ok, but the "talk" was about greed, not self-interest. We agree, I agree, greed is bad economically.

If these "neoliberalists" are saying greed is good, they are wrong. I don't know what they, the "neoliberalists" are actually saying though.

...

Neoliberalism the term is used more as a slur than any actual economic policy. Originally, it's intent was to find a successful compromise between capital and social economic policies.
Neoliberalism - Wikipedia

Now it seems more used by either side to imply any compromise between the two is a bad thing. However I don't see where "greed" is being touted as a precept for neoliberalism.