Sup Forums School of Economics

I've noticed of all subjects on Sup Forums, economics goes underappreciated the most often.

So, what does Sup Forums suggest one should read to gain a well-rounded economic understanding?
I'll start with pic related.

Other urls found in this thread:

amazon.com/How-Economy-Grows-Why-Crashes/dp/047052670X
www38.zippyshare.com/v/tZElnKDv/file.html
www101.zippyshare.com/v/2ACmMO6V/file.html
archive.org/details/principlesecono04tausgoog
youtube.com/watch?v=TI0V04dP4t8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>pol/ School of Economics
Can we get the Obamaleaf going so he BTFO right wing retards

...

Naked economics by Charles Wheelan is a good and fun to read introductory book.

>Right wing retards"
I bet your some degenerate dem soc who doesn't even know the first thing about basic micro. Pathetic.

Hayek refuted this bullshit.

Great Intro

Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell

trend of economic thinking by hayek

Sowell is good shit. Hard to get through some of his longer works tho.

One of the first redpills to wake me up from leftydom. Was recommended this by a uni prof believe it or not

His writing is so dense, but that's why it is the best

>citing Hayek

lurk more

I think Economics is the most right leaning social science

I had a "lefty" economics professor who assigned readings from Friedman, Sowell and Hayek and Rothbard

Is pic related worth going through?

whats wrong with hayek? he knows that state control can be subverted by jews and make us all serfs

Hayek knew full well that a shadowy international banking cabal ran the world and manipulated weak governments when he wrote.

His solution? Huehuehue, make your government weaker so you can get kicked around by Goldman Sachs like Greece.

The reality is you must be an organized, forceful agent of change to fight the bankers. You can have wet dreams about rag tag militias and remain maximumcucked, or you can take back your government.

Henry Hazlitt and F.A. Hayek among the greatest economists and of the Austrian School. Recommended is Ludwig von Mises.

Read Adam Smith. Speerian nat soc economics are also useful to understand.

Modern economic thinkers are all banker shills.

t.economics major

Absolutely. Hoppe is amazing and his analysis of political economy is one of the best of the 21st century.

>t.economics major

>make your government weaker so you can get kicked around by Goldman Sachs like Greece

If you think Hayek wanted anything to do with State controlled central banks you've clearly never read any of his works, or have failed to understand them entirely.

Pick up an intro to macro and micro book by people like Gregory Mankiw, Paul Krugman or Hal Varian.

These will be your stepping stones towards understanding what academic economists think and not randos on Sup Forums.

>Austrian school """economics"""

Just read Mankiw's, OP

Comfy bump

want to take economics in school to just get the degree

As an economics grad, maybe learn basic theory. Statistics is better unless you can read some really dense shit

>economics goes underappreciated the most often
economics can tell you how someone happened in the past, but it has absolutely no value in forecasting the future.
bullshit word games to justify paying sons and daughters of rich kids a fat wad of money

amazon.com/How-Economy-Grows-Why-Crashes/dp/047052670X

you can it free in pdf-form somewhere online

best way to get a really good 101 on economics. really quick read, and its written by peter fucking schiff

That is exactly the point. Cucking your government by getting rid of a central bank is the opposite of sensible policy. You want a central government that issues debt free greenbacks like Lincoln did or JFK tried. That is what scares the international banking cabal, not lolbertardians.

What do you think of Sowell?

Just gonna drop this here

listen to Chris Cantwell

>amazon.com/How-Economy-Grows-Why-Crashes/dp/047052670X


yeah math doesn't tell you anything. emotional liberal detected.

Great book. Learned so much from this.

Keynesian fags get out
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Pic related is all you need to know

Unless you're going somewhere like U Chicago not worth it. You'll waste most of your time learning autistic nonsense like the keynsian multiplier
t. regretful econ major

Macroeconomics textbook by Olivier Blanchard for well, macroeconomics. I have yet to find a good book on microeconomics

Oh god the multiplier...please don;t remind me

You're retarded if you think you should read Adam Smith to gain an understanding of economics.

...

>Jews run the state and the media
>They want to control your life so they take over banks subsidized by the government
>Get rid of the government so no more Jewish owned banks
>Competition limits the size and scope of banks

But yeah, we need more state controlled banks.

>hoppe

How's your new fedora?

...

How's that third condom full of cocaine fit up your ass? Is it snug?

Yeah I know, that's why I'm looking at MIT

I shat it into your moms mouth a while ago.

Ok, go ahead and explain why diamonds are more expensive than water. Apparently you reject the neoclassical theory of value.

Are you actually retarded? Water is infinitely more abundant than diamond. Little thing called supply and demand jackass.

How original

Economics is studied by people who want to protect and grow wealth/power/influence.

Does that sound like a right wing person or a left wing person?

Keep in mind left wing people think that wealth/power/influence are evil.

Whatever you do don't fall into the autistic Austrian school of economically illiterate.

Know these 7 concepts and you'll be fine

1. People respond to incentives
2. People want to maximize profit
3. Supply and demand determine price and quantity
4. Sometimes transactions affect people besides the buyer and the seller
5. Sometimes government intervention in the economy is good, but usually it's bad
6. Most economic models are conceptually ok, but they're generally autistic and fail to take into account how complex the world is
7. Jews control the gold

www38.zippyshare.com/v/tZElnKDv/file.html

You take for granted that this "paradox" wasn't solved by classical economists, dumbass. Adam Smith couldn't explain it to you. This "paradox" was only solved 100 years later by the neoclassical economists. You benefit from living in a period in which people learn marginal analysis in their high school microecon class.

Politics is economics manifest and sold to the plebs

The plebs who discuss politics dont get that, they just discuss stupid identity politics shit over and over and waste their time resources

If you open up the catalogue you'll witness it everywhere, and these are the people who think they're '''red pilled'', jej.

>Calling it autistic makes it wrong

Lemme guess you're one of those retards who falsely believes Austrianism denies ststistical analysis, aren't you?

What the fuck are you talking about?
People like Bohm Bawerk and Menger pioneered subjective value theory only decades after people like Bastiat. It really wasn't that hard to resolve.

Inflationary Keynesian kykenomics will be the end of USA

If it wasn't hard to resolve, then Adam Smith and the classical economists, with their labor theory of value, were retards.

No, they pioneered many advances, but simply didn't have the advantage of the years of economic thought prior to them. Ancient doctors weren't retards because they were wrong, they just didn't have the history behind them like we do.

www101.zippyshare.com/v/2ACmMO6V/file.html

Real-world economics is incompatible with Marxist ideology. That's why the left hates it.

So you pretty much agree with my previous posts. What is the point of your response?

Just because he was wrong about some things doesn't mean you should disregard him entirely.
He still invented modern economics and laid the groundwork for all capitalist thought going forward.
You don't just disregard history, you learn from it.

>Austrian economist Friedrich Hayek credited early enthusiasm for Henry George with developing his interest in economics. Later, Hayek said that the theory of Georgism would be very strong if assessment challenges didn’t lead to unfair outcomes, but he believed that they would.

I think we have technology now that can handle the assessment challenges

my macroeconomics teacher is in love with keynesian bullshit

I fucking hate that class and the fucking good for nothing Keynesian multiplier

You don't really need a book. Economics is basically the more rare something is in the market, the more it is worth

Principles of Economics by Frank Taussig
archive.org/details/principlesecono04tausgoog

It's a classic

There is nothing you could do with an econ degree that you couldn't with a math or stats degree. Those 2 degrees would actually give you a much larger & more useful skillset if you actually want to find a job outside of academia or the govt.

youtube.com/watch?v=TI0V04dP4t8

>((((((((Soros))))))))
What Jewry is this?

You don't have to agree with his politics but he's not wrong about reflexivity.

Literally anything by Milton Friedman.

Hayek was the bullshit

Classic

You haven't read George or Hayek faggot

This is the only good post in the thread

>Idolizing Sowell

Is it possible for libertarians to be more autistic and embarrassing?

No it isn't, do you live in a magical society where everyone rents out their houses for free? The same concept applies to money, as money is the perfect fungible good.

>defining limited government as "weak"

>citing Greece as an example of this

Well looks like I was wrong

Libertarians can always get even more autistic

Money is not a good you drooling idiot

Money is little more than a unit of account created and destroyed at whim

I'm sorry, and what exactly has your contribution to the economics of race been?

>(((Krugman)))
Damn Keynesians and stimulating their 'aggregate demand'. Were you even listening when Bastiat warned you about broken windows?

You are actually retarded.
Of course money is a good you imbecile it's just the most liquid of all goods.

>debt free greenbacks

You're fucking retarded

Are you retarded? Greece is the perfect example of a weak country getting raped by international finance

Limited government is automatically weak government

Imagine how shit the government would be at soling crimes if you limited the detective budget in a city to $3 a year

Happens that it is considered a good. Do you want to get paid in unwanted goods?

>People taking advice from a Noble Laureate economist is a bad thing

Literally fuck off yo intellectually worthless slime

Money isn't a good. It's more of a fungible abstraction representative of goods (and services) in a particular amount.

I like Hayek's the Constition of Liberty.

The only course where this really comes up is intermediate macro. All of my other courses were good. And I went to a saltwater school.

>Weak national governments getting fucked over by larger super national governments is bad so we need more government

Shill be gone

I'm not a worthless autistic libertarian so that's an accomplishment

Money is not a good

It can be used to exchange goods and services or wipeout an existing debt

It is best described as a unit of account

Money is a good, It's just that the market has decided it will be the most liquid of all goods to act as a medium of exchange.

All you need user.

Blanchard is fine. You'll learn IS-LM, AS-AD and neo-Keynesian stuff, but also Solow and Romer growth models.

It's not a good


Unless you want to return to barter (of course you do you're an autistic libertarian) you don't get paid in goods

Exactly

Basically whatever you do economically it will never be as retarded as what's in this book

Units of accounts/assets are all value holding goods you moron. It's just that money is the most liquid good to act as a medium of exchange which the market has agreed upon

You've literally contributed nothing to this thread other than "Lulz autistic lobertarians." Kys you know--nothing inbred retard.