Economic illiteracy.

[matgb]

Economics should be taught at a basic level right from age 11. Understanding the ruules of supply, demand, a free market and a free economy are essentials to get on in the modern world. Otherwise?

You get this sort of thing. Still, it killed time while I was eating lunch.

You either believe in a free society with markets, or you want a command/control economy where everything is fair and there's no dynamism or diversity. This little socialist gets it, why can't the 'normals'? Seriously, there are some obtuse people in there. Apparently, touts are killing live music? WTF?

ETA: Link fixed. OK?

Comments

[dainul.livejournal.com]

your link is oh-so-very-broken, I'm afriad.

[publicansdecoy.livejournal.com]

Dude, what's going on with your link?

I studied economics as part of my degree at uni. I mostly hated it. So much superstition.

-x-

[theweaselking.livejournal.com]

He appears to have pasted a snipper of the page instead of the URL to the page.

[mapp.livejournal.com]

I want to make a comment along the lines of "Economic illiteracy - how about HTML illiteracy?" but that would be mean.

Ah poo.

[matgb]

It would have been mean. Good job you didn't do it really.

[tiredstars.livejournal.com]

I'd agree with that.
I don't think it's a bad idea to have economics taught as part of a basic curriculum (though what to drop to make room for it?), but I'm liable to have major issues with the way it's taught. Because what are the chances of it basically ending up an indoctrination in neoclassical economic, rather than a decent introduction to political economy, market imperfections, and so-on. I know that's not how basic economics is taught at exeter, though I've heard A-level economics is a bit better (I did principle of economics in my first year, described by someone as like A-level with all the interesting bits taken out).

[thapunkprincess.livejournal.com]

I'd definitely agree with that. I took a-level economics, later graduated with a first in industrial economics, and later still took a masters in crit. theory. When I was studying for my undergrad, everything at A-level economics suddenly looked hopelessly simplistic, neoclassical Ricardian bollocks in thrall to the mystical force of 'supply' and 'demand' and 'the free market' as if such things actually existed! So I thought I was pretty sussed. Then when i took my masters I suddenly realised that my undergrad degree was only marginally less a simplification than my A-levels. In fact that was all bollocks too.

My conclusion is thus: economics is generally bollocks regardless of the level it is taught at. Teach politics, history and continental critical theory to kids instead - all of which involve economics, but as part of a broader sweep. I think even treating 'economics' as a subject in its own right is to fall some way into the hands of those who treat the figure of 'homo economicus' as the very heart of society.

[jackthomas.livejournal.com]

I think this is generally true in most subjects, and life in general.

[matgb]

Lots of superstition, yes, and I'm not an economist, I just make sure I understand enough to understand them.

But the very basics, such as demand exceeds supply, prices rise, is so basic that it should be knocked into anyone, and isn't. Link was me copying from the page instead of from the addressbar, and not checking. Me dumb.

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

I can't see the link (f-locked?) but I completely agree with you.

A basic understanding of markets is necessary to understand the way our society works - whether one agrees or disagrees with capitalism.

(Me, I think markets can explain just about everything, but then I am an accountant with an MBA... So I would, wouldn't I?)

[thapunkprincess.livejournal.com]

Is there such a thing as a 'basic understanding of markets', though? Why not 'a basic understanding of industrial relations' as the ground on which to 'understand the way our society works'?

[rhythmaning.livejournal.com]

I don't disagree with you at all; though I think an understanding of basic economics should come before an understanding of industrial relations, since the economics might inform the understanding of industrial relations.

Of course, it could be that I lack a sufficient understanding of industrial relations to support my argument...

[thapunkprincess.livejournal.com]

Okay, read the link. I should get into touting, seems like easy money. Who fucking cares if the fans of some shit band get upset? Not me. Vilifying touts falls right into the hands of the record industry, who obviously want to keep control of ticket supply and reap the profits. That's 'supply and demand' for yer - who demands and who supplies.

[matgb]

Aye, just reread again, and there are more comments, and some of them are beyond parody. "It's wrong, it's not fair when I can't afford a ticket, it denies real fans the chance to see the band..."

Because of course only fake wealthy fans pay £80 for a £20 ticket. FFS. Wrong target of ire, again, and people fall for it every time.

[mooism.livejournal.com]

I find it fascinating how the feudal concept of a just price lives on.