Economists and car maintenance.

[Shannow]

Brother in law is an economist.

About 14 years ago, he had a car (well, one of them). As a friendly brother in law, he bought the parts, and I serviced his car.

One Saturday, after a service, I suggested to him that the water pump bearings were sloppy and failing, and that as soon as he made it back down to the big smoke, he should get the water pump and coolant replaced. He agreed.

Three months later, he's at his parent's place again, and rings to say that the alternator is gone. I ask if it's a Bosch, or Nippondenso, he asks how to tell, I suggest he read the side of the alternator, he replies that he can't read it. I go to the local auto electrician, call in a few favours, and get one of each to take out to try...head out to fix the problem.

Turns out the alternator was Bosch...but seemed to not have a problem.

Turns out the water pump was seized.

went inside and declared economist boy was the unluckiest man in the universe, as his brand new water pump had seized, and I now had to drive back to town, and get another water pump to get him to work on Monday.

economist boy then told me (before I drove back into town) that he'd "deferred the expenditure" (all of $150), and had earned interest on it, justifying the deferral.

I pointed out that his alternator light came on at Katoomba, he finally stopped at Marangaroo at 2AM, his Dad's neighbor towed him at 2AM, he'd fucked up my Saturday to beg with a supplier to get two alternators as HE couldn't identify the device, let alone read the label on it, and then I had to beg to give those back and buy a water pump...no more car maintenance for economist boy.

He seemed genuinely pissed, as in his opinion, he'd made a rational economic decision.

Next car (was a nice car actually)., and he lived in Sydney's Western suburbs.

Broke his heel playing netball.

Complained about having to leave his car in a train car-park, as he didn't know who was leaving scratches on it.

I told him to not leave his car there...take a taxi, and leave the car in the garage..."but taxis are expensive"

Anyway, car got stolen 4 days later...but he saved heaps on taxi costs.

Next car was blowing smoke at 40,000km, as "manufacturers only specify services at set intervals to deny warranty claims. Car is out of warranty, and I'll service it when it needs it".

Short term gains...long term costs.

 

[Shannow]

My point ?

All of us have to learn to live in an economy (and funnily enough, it seems that the unmarried mothers etc are those best abled to adapt to the current one...maybe Darwin had a point).

Economists have to learn to live in the real world too.

 

[Dän]

^ fuck man, your brother in law is an economist, im surprised at least some of his credentials havent rubbed off on to you.

Economists do live in the real world. The real world is seldomly pretty, its morally terrible, full of cunts who make it a worse place. Economists dont try and remedy the ideological flaws in society, and nor should they, its not their job; they deal with reality, the reality we have, and through doing so, and through understanding how reality works, can make the world a better place. Indeed, more so than a sociologist ever would be able to.

My example on wages before is a prime example of this. In an ideologically perfect world we would be paid great sums of money, so much so that we could afford all of out wants and then some. Unfortunately, this isnt reality, the fact is that if you want more money you have a greater chance of losing your job, you want greater UE benefits, greater minimum wage, you have a greater chance of losing your job. Fact is that this system is far from perfect, but its the one we have, and you need to live with that. Economists and Financial people have an understanding of this greater than people in most other professions, and they are the ones who are able to maximise the potential that this reality that we live in has. Buy deriving formulas and setting up fake models that are mathematically perfect economists can pretict what will happen to an economy and factor in human behavior in the real world; can a sociologist do that?

Point is that economists do live in the real world, they create the real world and make it better by contuining to search for better, more efficient ways of determining things like wages, as to maximise employement, but also to keep wages at a decent level.

Why on Earth you would disagree with me on this is beyond me, and your faliure to recognise this would surely be offensive to people like ian macfarlane, who used to be cheif of RBA, who enabled and steered australia through a rocky period in the global economy, through the asian, euro and US crises and recessions. Without economists like him, who observe reality and act upon it, this country would be a worse place.

 

[Southy]

DAn, as much as I like you sometimes, you are a long way from anything you might call the real world, call back when you get there, or one day, if you make it to Brisbane, i'll take you out for a beer, and let you in on what some of the real world has to offer

 

[Goreripper]

But we live in an economy, not a society. Only pinkos live in societies.

 

[Goreripper]

economy: the management of the resources of a community, country, etc., esp. with a view to its productivity.

society: a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members

Which one do we live in again?

 

[Bucko]

I live in house in Conder

 

[Dän]

Funny how no one was able to debate my points haha, fucking typical. Read what I wrote, its good, well written, and is correct. If you cant live with it your not in the real world.

 

[Dän]

economy: the management of the resources of a community, country, etc., esp. with a view to its productivity.

society: a highly structured system of human organization for large-scale community living that normally furnishes protection, continuity, security, and a national identity for its members

Which one do we live in again?

We live in a place where we; You and I, are viewed, by policy makers on both parties and in the major banks and the RBA as units of production, not as humans. Like it? No, neither do I? Is it the reality of the world we live in ? Yes.

Ive said this many times; I dont like all aspects of free market capitalism; freedom is great, but it brings problems. But it is what we have, its the reality of where we live. Why cant you see that?

 

[Shannow]

Dan,
As an economist, then surely you of all people are situated to return the economy back to a tool of society, rather than the controller of society.

 

[Southy]

Again, you head is stuck too deep in the bloody text book mate, we all have the opinions we have, one way or another through LIFE EXPERIENCE, get soem, and call back, or come to brisso for a beer, I got some fucking scary stories for you....

 

[Dän]

Dan,
As an economist, then surely you of all people are situated to return the economy back to a tool of society, rather than the controller of society.

Im not an economist yet; But i sencerily hope I become one so that I can attempt to make the world a better place. And I mean that.

 

[Dän]

Again, you head is stuck too deep in the bloody text book mate, we all have the opinions we have, one way or another through LIFE EXPERIENCE, get soem, and call back, or come to brisso for a beer, I got some fucking scary stories for you....

Well that may be; I wont deny that i follow theory and text books, but everything ive said is correct and is relevant to life.

My point on how wages are determined is correct, i can assure you of that.

 

[Southy]

I don't doubt the THEORY of it all, but THEORY is just that little buddy, when it becomes a reality, as in something that works out here in the cold cold real world, then I won't have a problem with it

 

[Shannow]

Im not an economist yet; But i sencerily hope I become one so that I can attempt to make the world a better place. And I mean that.

A noble quest, and if you can pursue it, then you have earned my respect.

Well that may be; I wont deny that i follow theory and text books, but everything ive said is correct and is relevant to life.

My point on how wages are determined is correct, i can assure you of that.

I spent years studying textbooks to become an Engineer.

One of the final lessons that they taught was that engineering is not an exact science. If it were, then we'd never have had an industrial revolution, as all of the buildings that we designed on first principals would have fallen over before they were built.

Your textbooks are guides, and as an economist you have no such truths as Hooke's law.

Any "laws" determined in theory are merely an educated guess. But way better then a stab in the dark.

Enjoy the rest of your education, and enjoy paying it back.

 

[Dän]

Yes, but, some things in the real world are determined by pure theory; how your wages are determined are one such example. This is particually true in economics because mathematically perfect models are created to replicate an economy to experiment on, becuase you cant experimant on a real world economy. So the models and the theory created in economics capture real life very closly. Thats why I persits with the theory, because I think that it does show a snapshot of how things go on behins the scenes.

edit, that was posted at salty's post

 

[Dän]

A noble quest, and if you can pursue it, then you have earned my respect.



I spent years studying textbooks to become an Engineer.

One of the final lessons that they taught was that engineering is not an exact science. If it were, then we'd never have had an industrial revolution, as all of the buildings that we designed on first principals would have fallen over before they were built.

Your textbooks are guides, and as an economist you have no such truths as Hooke's law.

Any "laws" determined in theory are merely an educated guess. But way better then a stab in the dark.

Enjoy the rest of your education, and enjoy paying it back.

I disagree, thigs like the dynamic okuns law are all acurate measures of an economy, honest.

 

[Shannow]

Then we don't need a Government.
Just plug a few formulae into the RBA, and off we go to an economically sound future.

Real life doesn't work like that.

 

[Dän]

No, we need gov to centralise taxation and to orchestate many number of things. To suggest otherwise is naive.

 

[Dän]

See, this is what shits me, i post logocal coherant stuff, you cant debate it, so post stupid shit like that. Why do you do it?