My first thought is “prediction is a b---- and macroeconomics is less predictable than anything else. Expecting to make predictions, and have them be right, is crazy.” Now, I know there’s a problem with that. (lthough, subjectively, I’m not doubting my knowledge any more than I was. I was going to type “Which makes me hugely suspect of my supposed knowledge”, but then I realized that’s not true and I was just signaling how “rational” I am (which, to go another level into meta-space, is, I think, what I’m doing right now, by telling you that I was going to falsely signal, then realized it and restrained myself))
Making predictions. That’s a good idea. I don’t have anything to lose except some false beliefs or some unfounded confidence in some beliefs.
What are some simple questions of which I can predict answers?
Not necessarily macroeconomics which are hard because if you can successfully predict things in that sphere, there is usually a simple way to monetize that ability.
Look at your economic intuitions. What kind of claims do they make? What do they think they can predict?
That if somthign is hard to get or make it will cost more than if its easy to get or make.
That some consumption is conscious consumption and provides a signalling benefit which swamps the direct material benefit.
Higher order goods have a longer delay to pay-off in the form of first order goods, but the progression to higher and higher order goods and the specialization that drives it, is economic growth.
People like variety in their consumption because of LMD in their utility functions.
If the price of a good rises, the prices of its compliment goods will fall slightly and the prices of its substitute goods will rice slightly (since people will buy more of substitute and less of the complement and supply & demand.
Economies of scale.
There’s no such thing as a free lunch.
(If you know that diminishing marginal returns are pervasive and allow for trade between actors, pretty much all of classical economics follows by implication.)
Hmm...
My first thought is “prediction is a b---- and macroeconomics is less predictable than anything else. Expecting to make predictions, and have them be right, is crazy.” Now, I know there’s a problem with that. (lthough, subjectively, I’m not doubting my knowledge any more than I was. I was going to type “Which makes me hugely suspect of my supposed knowledge”, but then I realized that’s not true and I was just signaling how “rational” I am (which, to go another level into meta-space, is, I think, what I’m doing right now, by telling you that I was going to falsely signal, then realized it and restrained myself))
Making predictions. That’s a good idea. I don’t have anything to lose except some false beliefs or some unfounded confidence in some beliefs.
What are some simple questions of which I can predict answers?
Not necessarily macroeconomics which are hard because if you can successfully predict things in that sphere, there is usually a simple way to monetize that ability.
Look at your economic intuitions. What kind of claims do they make? What do they think they can predict?
That if somthign is hard to get or make it will cost more than if its easy to get or make.
That some consumption is conscious consumption and provides a signalling benefit which swamps the direct material benefit.
Higher order goods have a longer delay to pay-off in the form of first order goods, but the progression to higher and higher order goods and the specialization that drives it, is economic growth.
People like variety in their consumption because of LMD in their utility functions.
If the price of a good rises, the prices of its compliment goods will fall slightly and the prices of its substitute goods will rice slightly (since people will buy more of substitute and less of the complement and supply & demand.
Economies of scale.
There’s no such thing as a free lunch.
(If you know that diminishing marginal returns are pervasive and allow for trade between actors, pretty much all of classical economics follows by implication.)