Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by darobin (1316) on 2002.01.01 12:02 (#2566) Homepage Journal

    I very much doubt that making (macro)economic choices more democratic would bring much more sense to that area, but at least it can't make it that much worse ;-) I took an Economy section bac (the french A levels more or less) and was thus brought to have several hours of Economy lectures a week for three years. The one impression that lasted long from that field is that no one has any idea whatsoever what's going on.

    In fact, the last Nobel prize for Economy (iirc, it might have been the previous one) went not to people that had found something the main outcome of which was found to be positive, but instead that had proved existing theories wrong. Rare is the discipline that considers debunking Nobel-worthy ! (even though it is very good debunking of neo-liberalism showing that the asymetry of information in a number of markets means that a state controlled economy fulfils the goals of liberalism better than liberalism itself).

    Re democracy, I think it is indeed a way to manifacture consent but that that isn't necessarily as bad as it sounds. Consenting adults do more interesting things ;-) A minimal amount of stability (which wouldn't be achieved so easily by an enlightened aristocracy as suggested by for instance Plato) can go a long way in making it possible for people to do long term development and probably has other advantages that I can't really think of in the post-nye-party wreckage of my brain. Happy new year !

    --

    -- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]