Один экономист регулярно позорится комментариями по макроэкономике и ЦБ, буквально вещает с авторитетным видом глупости
На этой неделе признался, что Вудфорда не читал и комментировать не может
Уверен, от комментариев в будущем этот факт его не остановит
Behold: General Equilibrium
GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM IS LIFE!
youtube.com/watch?v=FDFBG7_0…
Every single central bank in the world is wrong! Hope they’ll see the light 💡
PK really could have celebrated this one and they chose not to
Forever irrelevant
Since Woodford is in the news …
aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.12…
Doing this but for Russia rn
Did WWII actually make the U.S. economy more productive?
New EPH Podcast episode with Alexander J. Field: manufacturing productivity fell roughly 18% between 1941 and 1945, and the "production miracle" story deserves a second look.
▶️ youtu.be/DGDXhBlq8PA
Чарльз Перси Сноу писал про две культуры еще в 1950-е, тоже дотянулся проклятый Сталин?
vivovoco.ibmh.msk.su/VV/PAPE…
Replying to @GrandKhryu
срач технарей и гуманитариев — это советский конструкт, раздутый, потому что авторитарной власти таки нужны образованные люди — но они тем удобнее и покладистей, чем более дремучи в общественных дисциплинах, поэтому власти выгодно придавать оным ореол шарлатанства.
£2m home so he’s not a super rich guy makes sense I guess
Wealthy HSBC banker is banned from the City for dodging £5,900 in train fares after using 'doughnutting' ticket scam on commutes from £2m home trib.al/Yni2oNN
I think people really slept on all these controversies and why Princeton University Press won’t publish him anymore
I’m surprised Gregory Clark hasn’t found a publisher for his new book, in particular as A Farewell to Alms and The Son Also Rises sold fairly well.
econjwatch.org/file_download…
🇷🇺 💪
Replying to @joefrancis505
Actually even this PPP conversion based on consumer goods prices like bread, a shirt, and apples underestimates Chinese and Russian (and specially Iranian) military expenditures compared to US and Western European countries.
That is because a big component of military expenditures are labor costs, which in the US military for example, are 39% of total expenditures.
Thus, a more serious estimate of, lets say, Russian military expenditures would first incorporate the fact that the Russian military is now about 4/3 of the size of the US's, thus its labor costs alone are equivalent to 500 billion USD.
Then one should consider that Russian equipment costs are lower even in PPP terms (a Russian artillery shell or tank is much cheaper even in PPP terms than an equivalent American, British or German). Thus, if the US, for example, wished to replicate the Russian military as it exists today it could easily cost north of its own military budget of 1 trillion USD: it has 250 combat brigades compared to 58 for the US.
In regards to comparing British and Russian potential warmaking potential, one should consider demographic/material/industrial indicators, not GDP: valued added by lawyers and financial institutions is not convertible into military power.
In terms of population, Russia is only 2.4 times Britain. But in terms of primary energy consumption, Russian primary energy consumption is 5 times Britain, consider steel output, Russian steel output is 15 times Britain. Thus, despite having a lower GDP per capita, since the Russian economy is based on material industries while the British is services based, Russian warmaking potential per capita is substantially higher than Britain.































