News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on. Keep on-topic
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Economics degrees are astrology for white men. This only reinforces that point.
As someone with an economics-heavy business degree, I have said this since my intro to economics course. The fact that there are "schools", and that some mainstream theories last only for years, not even decades, and that all governments who come in will "try" a "recipe" to see what works, is telling enough. The "laws" of economics are "kinda", "usually", "generally", and above all "conditional". There are a few things that are almost laws, like the fact that humanity is driven by the seven cardinal sins of which most can be translated into economic characteristics, and cycles (which we are hell bent in forgetting every time we are at a crest).
I'm thermodynamic's bitch. That shit is. You can't cheat them laws.
The fact that the seven cardinal sins have officially been codified as a principle of economics is... telling...
What are the primary drivers of humanity? Lust, greed, envy, gluttony, sloth, wrath, and pride.
"Now how can we exploit that to extract more profit" is a question only a sociopath would ask. It explains so much about industry today though, especially marketing and yes, social media.
And gambling, let's not forget the casinos and lottery raffles
The kind of gambling where the biggest losers are the ones who are not participating, and they keep whining that the winners should give them something too.
Ah yes, the self acclaimed winner in the wild.
Big toes youve got there, winning!
I'm doing quite ok, actually. Most probably better than 99% of the people commenting here in just about every way possible.
I'm not really a gambling man, though.
I'm stealing this.
Astrology has more reality than economics does. At least the movements and positions of the planets is something real.
People used to navigate by it, plant and harvest by it, nomads would migrate by the movements of the stars.
Economics is just... "How much confirmation bias can we use to rationalize conclusions we've already determined in advance, in order to convince governments and investors to give us money that doesn't even exist?" and "How can we frame these numbers to keep people from rioting?"
Yes but being sad because mercury is in gatorade or whatever isn't "real", it's literally prescribed to you by someone who says that when planets do X then your mood or success in whatever endeavors must be Y and Z
If the only thing you've heard about astrology is the "newspaper horoscopes" that attempt to be prescriptive in that way, then I could see having that opinion.
I would also argue that people who read those horoscopes and take them seriously, also do not understand astrology.
My point is that "Mercury in retrograde" is a real phenomenon, unlike "self-regulating market" or "rational/ethical consumer," or any of the other things economists use to try to justify deregulation, austerity, and "infinite growth."
My argument isn't that Mercury retrograde has any effect on your mood. That's a claim I didn't make. But from the perspective of earth, there are times when Mercury appears to reverse its course. The other planets do it too. Hence, it is "more real than economics."
There absolutely are real phenomenon in economics. There are none in astrology that have been proven.
But that's not astrology. Astrology is the art of giving it mysterious meanings. Mercury being in retrograde is an astronomical phenomenon.
The problem with economics is that it's essentially sociology and you obviously can't make absolute laws about things that involve people. But I'll give you two simple examples that absolutely have been proven time and time again:
Induced demand - if you make something more available (cheaper), that in of itself is usually enough to make demand for it higher.
Inelastic demand - if something is an absolute necessity then it becoming more expensive doesn't reduce demand to 0 (healthcare, fuel).
#2, incidentally, is one reason why markets will never be truly efficient and need to be regulated. The equilibrium of supply and demand can't be what determines the price of healthcare, transportation, etc.
Economics blows up when you try to make things absolute rules, or when you try to rationalize markets that have people with tons of money FOMOing bullshit based on marketing. Two problems come to mind:
The P/E ratio of 10 is stated as a rule in investing, but there's no reason that's the exact right amount, it's really just something that on average, people buying stocks find a sensible return rate because similar rates could be achieved elsewhere too.
Conversely to the last point, people marketing IPOs for companies making zero profit will convince you that really horrible P/E is fine because those companies will take over the entire global market for whatever. See, that'd be true IFF there's a market AND they remain the biggest player. Just because a P/E ratio of 10 being optimal isn't an absolute law of the universe doesn't mean a P/E ratio of 1000 is any good.
As stated to you in a other comment. Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same. The only similarities they have is relying on the position of planets and celestial bodies. Astrology is pure pseudoscience.
Seeing as economics is also a pseudoscience, I don't see how that contradicts my point at all.
I said the movements of the stars and planets as described by astrology is a real phenomenon. Unless you want to dispute that, you're arguing against a strawman of your own construction.
You’re confusing astrology and astronomy.
No, astronomy is the modern science of measuring and studying outer space. It grew out of astrology in the same way that the modern science of chemistry grew out of alchemy.
Astrology and celestial navigation are not the same thing. Astrology has nothing to do with navigation or planting/harvesting cycles. The only similarities astrology has with any of that is the position of planets, but astrology is strictly a divinatory practice.
If you don't see the inherent connection between those two things, then I don't know what to tell you.
If an ancient boat captain was consulting an ephemeris to determine their exact position, who do you think wrote/published the ephemeris?
Long before written language was ever invented, who do you think was studying the stars and saying "now is the time to plant"?
If that's "divinatory" then so be it, but looking at it from a modern lens of how the term is commonly used today, is anachronistic. And it doesn't change my original point anyway, because the movements of the stars are real, unlike the so-called "laws" of economics.