"economists*" who have "done the maths" vs economists who have done the math.
Post
Conversation
Post your reply
A new growth paradigm - perhaps popularly referred to as a "reset" - would seem, inevitably, to involve a foundational base which can't reduce further than its starting point or "genesis". Like John Nash, we like Zermelo set theory here
Quote
John Nash Institute (London)
@JNI_London
The ZFC Axiom of Foundation prevents infinite descending or circular membership chains and enforces a well-founded extending hierarchy: Satoshi rejects endian mismatches in the manner Nash rejects excessive complexity in avoiding Gödel-like traps.
x.com/famous_ideal/s
On the tension between growth and nature with a focus on resource economies: my 10 cents worth open access global.oup.com/academic/produ
There is no notion of the environment in Pritchett and Lewis, this is a complete fairytale.
César Montes is sent off 
This is the first time 3 players have been shown a red card in a FIFA World Cup opening match
This is the first time 3 players have been shown a red card in a FIFA World Cup opening matchThe media could not be played.
The degrowth argument is based on the metric of human happiness which fails criteria (i) therefore is not affected by the result of this paper.
Has anyone actually read Prichett and Lewis? Their argument is that GDP is a good measure of welfare, regardless of how its defined. Not that growth should be a policy goal nor that growth will give an increase in welfare, which are very different claims.
High level of output per person translates into high levels of essential goods available for consumption per capita.
Golly, who'd have thunk it
And yet, over time, the correlation between welfare and GDP has been weak at best for developed economies, and equality more strongly explains welfare.
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf
"economists*" who have done the maths I like vs economists who have done the maths i don’t like… and it works both ways.
Just by the font and general stupidity I can tell this is The Guardian. Am I right?
Longing for economists that have done the assumptions right.
The math is technique.
I've done the maths and it says that 90 per cent of GDP criticism is driven by french inferiority complex. FACT
