I want to learn the basics of economics. Help a brother out.

Unversity of Texas will have free courses online beginning next year but in the interim - I believe Princenton and Harvard have a full schedule of free undergraduate courses online currently.

lol lol lol lol wrote:

http://www.amazon.com/Economics-One-Lesson-Shortest-Understand/dp/0517548232

Thanks for the input guys! Have you actually read this yourself or are you just posting something you found through google? I don't mind either way, I'm just curious. This looks like it could be a good place to start based on the reviews.

where do you attend a university where Macroeconomics and Micro are not required for a major in Math? Sheesh - take a freecking course in Economics! Seriously - please tell where you go to school!

You are 20? And are attending a college or university? So maybe a junior? They have electives - if you really were interested you would have signed up already. And if you really attending a university - Eco would have already been required for a math degree - please do tell where you are attending - I doubt you are a math major.

Definitely read Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt before delving into anything involving economic calculation or mathematical modeling such as econometrics.

Here it is in PDF:

http://c457332.r32.cf2.rackcdn.com/pdf/books/Economics_in_one_lessonOCR.pdf

This doesn't have any math beyond simple arithmetic. What it does teach you is how to think like an economist should - looking at the whole picture and in terms of how people behave, not along the lines of short-term thinking and mathematical models which are of little use when addressing the uncertain future states of knowledge and behavior of subjectively-thinking human beings. The "one lesson" is based on Frederic Bastiat's "broken window fallacy" and the entire book gives many examples of its application in various areas of economics, continually prompting you to look not only at how an action, decision or policy affects an individual or the specific faction of society you directly see it affect in the here and now, but also how the decision affects the aggregate of society in both the present and the future.

MIT PhD student in Economics ( and runner...) here. Ask me whatever you want

MIT_graduate wrote:

MIT PhD student in Economics ( and runner...) here. Ask me whatever you want

Okay - will ask - what do serious students of economics think of Paul Krugman?

MIT_graduate wrote:

MIT PhD student in Economics ( and runner...) here. Ask me whatever you want

One thing that always fascinated me was the concept of "utils" whereby your purchasing habit governed by how much utility you gain figuring in the price you pay. Can you expand on that? I try to tell my mom about that but been like 30 years so forgot much of it.

Lie, cheat, and steal.

Also lots of hype and hope followed by sorry and misery.

Thats all you need to know.

The "util" is actually fictitious. It is an attempt to quantify the wholly subjective notion of value or satisfaction. The "util" is often used in formulating equations and drawing visually pleasing graphs to perform calculations. Some economists are fond of attempting to quantify value/utility, largely because these economists are mathematically inclined.

But value is actually the relationship between choice alternatives for a given person in a specific context. It varies from person to person and from one context to another. Since we cannot predict our future state of knowledge, we cannot even know if the utility derived from an economic good will be the same tomorrow as it is today. I may discover a new use for eggs tomorrow and the value I place on eggs will be entirely different than it is today. The satisfaction I gain from eating strawberries may grow higher the more I eat them. Then again, I may develop an allergy to strawberries after eating 50 of them every day for 3 months, and then their utility will decrease to below its original level.

Utility cannot be precisely quantified all the time.

Are you really an African American? I won't help until I know you really are a brother.

MIT_graduate wrote:

MIT PhD student in Economics ( and runner...) here. Ask me whatever you want

I've always thought the success of modern (especially conservative but most all American) economic priciples depended on a fair playing field, which we do not have. If corporate leaders can be rewarded as well or better for leading their company into sale or foreclosure, doesn't that throw the circular principles out of whack? I want to believe in a free market as much as anyone but can't get over my lack of trust in the system. Can you weigh in? Thanks.

The thing you have to remember about economics is that it is not a science but a way or organizing human behavior.

It is presented to you as if the idea that supply and demand sets price is as much of a law of the world as f = ma or e = mc^2. It is not. Capitalism is not a natural law of the universe

I took a Macroeconomics course in college and don't know crap about economics or finance.

Carless Joe Jackson wrote:

where do you attend a university where Macroeconomics and Micro are not required for a major in Math? Sheesh - take a freecking course in Economics! Seriously - please tell where you go to school!

Here's all you need to know: if it happened on Bush's watch, it's the Republicans' fault. And if it happened on Obama's watch, it's tge Repuvlicans' fault.

NJ Possible wrote:

I've always thought the success of modern (especially conservative but most all American) economic priciples depended on a fair playing field, which we do not have. If corporate leaders can be rewarded as well or better for leading their company into sale or foreclosure, doesn't that throw the circular principles out of whack? I want to believe in a free market as much as anyone but can't get over my lack of trust in the system. Can you weigh in? Thanks.

You need to get your definitions right. Corporate bailouts are not a function of the free market, but acts of government interference in the market. In a proper free market, which we do not have, failed businesses would be allowed to go bankrupt, the incompetent people would lose their positions and competent people would come in and replace them. Our current government policy of rewarding failure definitely does not work (at least if a healthy, rational, successful, fair economy is your standard of success), but you must understand that the problem is caused by government, not the market.

One more thing. If you don't think the government should spend more than it has, you are a RACIST!

srsly wrote:

Lie, cheat, and steal.

Also lots of hype and hope followed by sorry and misery.

Thats all you need to know.

This^^