You silence a Nobel economist by showing them Alex Gheg's video. The logical flaws of the neoclassical theory are exposed by asking two simple questions. What is quality? What is convenience? youtube.com/watch?v=2c4mvGekYZY
@IlirMr I don't see how this exposes a flaw in anything, since one of the points in neoclassicism is that value, whether by quality, quantity or convenience is always up to the purchaser, and that none of the modalities used in economics are ever absolutely true in a real world setting, where no one can possibly predict the vast variety of reasons why a consumer does something. This was a good video, but I don't think it refutes what you think it does. If anything, it reinforces it.
Hold on now, what do you expect them to say? Do you expect them to bring some kind of mastersolution? I´m sure they´ve thought about the US economy at some point. But how do you even answer a question like that?
@aguyyaknow He could answer the question with something rather than NOTHING!
See Sims' whole statement. He says the gov't must create conditions for long term growth without upsetting short term growth. NO SHIT. Ask me how the Vancouver Canucks could have won the Stanley cup and I say "they should have score more goals than the other team", would I get the Nobel prize in hockey strategy?
Austrian economics does not lean on data like a crutch, but it is validated by the data.
Let´s extend that metaphor. Let´s say that you were asked how to win a major hockey-game. Exactly what kind of answer do you think SHOULD earn you an award? Some kind of movement strategy? Tips on how to hold the stick? Giving a precise description of how to exercise? Most such answer would probably turn into shit if people tested them. These kinds of question are simply too complicated to be answered in the precise in-depth way that you seem to be asking for.
I am going to assume you are responding to that comment in the category "top rated". Sorry if I´m wrong but I´ve written several comments to this video due to discussions.
No, it´s not sarcasm, I mean it very much. The question "how do you solve the US-economy" is, in laymans terms, really f#cking difficult to answer. In fact, there may not even be an answer.
Sure they are, but some questions are really bloody difficult no matter what kind of brainiac you are. Imagine that you could travel back through time and ask George Orwell how to run a country, or Oscar Wilde how to live your life, don´t you think that they would be stumped for a while? Personally I think they would need quite some time to think of a proper answer. Now imagine that on top of the complexity there´s also an entire world watching you. You get my point, right?
That's why the Right Livelihood Award is a much better alternative to the Nobel Prize...
...but this still doesn't validate something as stupid as Austrian economics.
It's worth noting that a stupid charlatan economist like Milton Friedman also received the Nobel Prize. His ideology7 is the Chicago School of economics, which is simply an off-shoot of the Austrian School- which is just total & complete nonsense!
@TeaPartyTerroristss Milton Friedman is the opposite of these guys. Short, direct, understandable answers. Look anywhere on Youtube for his opinions. No one to my knowledge has ever properly rebutted his views, they simply ignore him and create Newer Deals.
@winmine0327, that's the problem. Some issues, like economics, are a lot more complex than what an academic charlatan like Friedman, Hayek, or Mises would explain through "arguments" that are based on absolutely nothing but philosophical conjecture, false axiom systems, & flawed a priori assumptions. There's someting called NUANCE that many libertarians don't seem to grasp. The economic problems in the US are multifaceted. You can't just scapegoat the FED or spending & expect it to be realistic.
@TeaPartyTerroristss I simply want to impress on you the idea that Friedman did not simply demagoguery, but had knowledge of the history he based his ideas off of. I can't speak for him in a youtube comment but look for his 'Free to Choose' debates to get a better idea of him.
@winmine0327, oh please! I used to be a libertarian for many years before I changed my mind on that whole realm of philosophical, economic, & political thought! What Friedman presented in all his works is a misinterpretation of historical facts- if not outright historical revisionism! He negelects to mention several major factors that actually would poke huge holes in his "logic. When I alluded to demagoguery of the FED, I was mostly pointing to today's most ardent proponents of libertarianism
@TeaPartyTerroristss The whole point that economists like Hayek tried to convey is just that-- that the economy is too complex for any one to understand beyond a micro level of their own needs, resources, etc. Attempting to go beyond this and direct the economy where you want it to go from a larger level is what's made the US economy so tangled up and distorted.
@bjlayd61 yes I know. I'm a former libertarain. The problem with that is it's like saying that even if you get up into a helicopter to look at the state of a forest fire, you still won't be able to ascertain how large it is. Or even if you have setellite imaging showing you the extent of the damage, you still don't know what's going on. The problem with this school of thought is that facts can be staring you in the FACE & you STILL could play dumb just so you can cling to flawed ideology.
@415Dub the only problem is that free markets have never existed any time in history of human kind & they never will exist.
The definition of "free market" changes from person to person, often times according to the expediency of the advocate's philosophical bias.
In truth, there have never in the history of human kind been a single country in recorded history that has developed successfully through adaherence to free market principles. Not the USA, not Hong Kong, & not even Singapore.
Impressive use of the word "stupid" twice, combined with "nonsense" - all about the Austrian Economics. You really, really don't have anything in your bag besides hot air and Keynesian social engineering, do you?
I'm sure Keynesian "TeaPartyTerroristss" will suggest that government spend even more & raise the debt even more to "stimulate the economy" (aka INFLATION) until the hell breaks loose
Keynesians nearly always have one solution - "create" more money (& inflation obviously) - economy is doing well then create more money, economy is doing bad then create more money, same stupid "solution", & of course, politicians & bankers that get to create it are all good while people suffer
@TeaPartyTerroristss - I feel so informed after reading your aptly put piece about "stupid" Austrian theory, complete with sources and arguments of course. Chicago school an offshoot of Austrian theory? Really? Read some Hayek and Rothbard and you'll find not only that you've been misinformed, but that the only total and complete nonsense here is in fact your comment...
Austrian Economics is WAY better than the ever useless Keynesian Economics which has failed MISERABLY allover the globe, bred by a person who explained away booms & busts with "animal spirits"; if Keynesians can't even pinpoint the cause properly then no wonder they've no answers, the ONLY reason Keynesian Economics took off because politicians & bankers loved the idea of "creating money" out of thin air; Keynesianism = COMMUNIST CENTRAL-PLANNING
@halflifeproductionz Nonsense. What you need to understand is that data doesn't tell you anything on a larger scale. You can have data showing that your economy is great, and at the same time the economy could be on the last day before a total collapse. Austrians focus on an actual theory that includes data, but puts it into perspective.
@halflifeproductionz Austrian economics is validated by empirical data, it's just not it's basis. It's basis is a series of principles derived a priori that are necessarily implied by particular actions. For example if two people are voluntarily exchanging something then they necessarily value what they are getting over what they are giving. It may turn out that they were wrong to value it more, but in that moment it describes an axiom austrian economics base other principles on.
HAHAHA everything is funny, my god people in America are getting stupider and gullible each day . The economy is going to shit, but these people came to see an entertainment show.
This video is really misleading. I watched the entire press conference and right after Christopher Sims says that preface about having to crunch numbers to assess the US government's treatment of the current events, he actually GIVES his own opinion, which was completely cut out of this video. If you watch the whole thing, these Nobel Prize winners actually know a lot about the economy. Who would have ever guessed this?
@louiscarruthers Not surprising. One of the common trait of right wing extremism is to discredit academics and intellectuals. From Umberto Eco's "Eternal Fascism" [Fascists use terms like]' "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." '
Just looking at the comments from Schiff supporters, you'd think Eco was talking about them.
The two comments below, quoted from Princeton's website, outline the two laureates' area of work for which they were being honored. I had hoped that the information might shed light on the reason they could not answer the questions from the audience but, as best as I could interpret, it does not. The link for the quoted text is here: princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S31/82/88E23/
Nobel Memorial Prize for their work in answering "questions regarding the causal relationship between economic policy and different macroeconomic variables such as GDP (gross domestic product), inflation, employment and investments."
"Economic-policy decisions are influenced by expectations about developments in the private sector. The laureates' methods can be applied to identify these causal relationships and explain the role of expectations. This makes it possible to ascertain the effects of unexpected policy measures as well as systematic policy shifts."
This makes me sad. What were they there for? I am convinced that these people are not as stupid as this clip makes them seem, even though I agree with Schiff on most of the issues. It truly baffles me, this.
The clips of the Nobel Prize winners are very disturbing. It's scary how dumb people have become, and how much recognition and prestige is worth, even if it means nothing.
I don't think the economist did anything wrong. Friedrich Hayek, in his Nobel Prize Banquet Speech said he was against giving Nobel Prize in Economics because "[...] the Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess". In a world where no single man knows how to make a pencil, any person (even a prize-winning economist) can't speak knowledgeably. I think Christopher Sims understood it quite well.
@AmbujSaxena Yes. Hayek very much based his support for markets on the notion that markets know what no individual or organisation knows... and that would apply to the best economists too. However sometimes it is hard to see wisdom in what some markets do, and easier to see the work of chaos.
These Nobel Prize winners are an embarrassment. They can't even answer a question about the US economy. Instead, they stare blackly at each other while being laughed at by the audience. These people are pathetic, and anyone that defends them is also pathetic.
@woweifj the idea that you need mathematical modeling for economics is based on the flawed premise that a complicated system that includes numbers must necessarily have some mathematical motor. If that were true, Keynesian ideas would ALWAYS work. The truth is economics is more closely related to the field of psychology than mathematical modeling.
How does that imply that Keynesian ideas always work? Keynes himself seldom wrote in mathematically precise language, and his ideas weren't formalized using rational models until the Lucas Critique came about. Math in economics has nothing to do with aligning with certain ideology, but it is the only tool with which you can rigorously frame your ideas in a scientific way. Even the "psychology" and behavioral aspects you refer to must be formalized to be taken seriously.
A simple answer is hard to come by when you make your living writing research papers like "A 9 Variable Probabilistic Macroeconomic Forecasting Model" or "ARMA Index Modeling as Estimation in Infinite Dimensional Parameter Space". What a dolt.
Peter Schiff is an idiot beyond belief! All of his comments and interpretations just prove how little gray matter he was endowed with. It's a surprise he even went to college. But bashing noble laureates does get you extra listeners on the radio, I guess. The truth is that there are no "right" answers, just as Sims suggested in his reply. If there was a simple method or answer to questions like "what is the right policy to raise employment?", then we would know these answers already!
@arodnyansky You're wrong. Sims was too dumbfounded to blurt out even that there are no simple answers. He couldn't say one intelligible thing about monetary policy, fiscal policy, private or public debt, unemployment, etc. His response was, derp, well, I'd have to look at the data and gosh, you don't think I can come up with anything off the top of my head, don'tcha.
@arodnyansky Without knowing much about you, I can already tell that it's not mr. Schiff who is the idiot here, but you. mr. Schiff actually understands economics like it should be understood. Very few people come even close to his level of understanding.
What you need to understand, is that Nobel Price these days means absolutely nothing. In recent years there has been a high "inflation" meaning the value of the people receiving the price has been declining sharply. Obama is a perfect example.
@arodnyansky No right answers? No one is asking for a simple answer, but in a nutshell. Agree or disagree about the ongoing policies implemented by our glorious leaders. This is just plain embarrassing to even watch. As for Nobel laureates, have you researched Long-Term Capital Management? You should.
Yes, and while you're at it, please ask physicists to explain string theory "in a nutshell" to an audience with no mathematical training. How useful would that be?
LTCM's failure was, in large part, brought about by bad luck. Instead of hiding behind the fact that Bob Merton was on the board of a sinking hedge fund, perhaps you should focus on your flimsy argument about why the economics Nobel prize has been misappropriated and why Sims' (or even Bob Merton's) work is not deserving.
@woweifj Don't compare complicated physics with straightforward economics. Here's a newsflash; I got a degree in Economics and if I were to apply majority of the theories I have learned, I'd be broke. Peter Schiff is an idiot? Yes the "failure" of his business speaks volumes. What have you done with your life? LTCM was bad luck? Yes of course, that's the point! The inherent non-linearity of life and low probability, high-impact events. Man, I'm hungover and responding to you made me feel better.
Your BA does not make you an expert. What economic theory do you know beyond basic supply and demand arguments provided in Econ 101 textbooks? Complicated physics and straightforward economics?Tell me the difference between the MCMC methods or PDE's used in physics and those in economics. The fact that you proclaim the "inherent non-linearity of life [and low prob events]" to be great insight indicates that you're a high-schooler or scrub business major who's never opened an econ journal
@arodnyansky Do you actually do research or do you just suppose your assumptions are gospel truth? Please read up on Austrian economics before coming back to comment. There are answers out there, but the fact of the matter is most politicians are ignorant of them. Additionally, without using major modeling, there isn't much money to be made by being an Austrian economist, so the ones who do it as a career tend to be Keynesians.
@TheCSFive That's like having Jesus in front of you, as asking him to describe his favorite miracle to you. You don't want a synopsis of their work, you want to ask questions that pertain to you. (IE. What is the meaning of life; why do bad things happen to good people; what caused the collapse; how can we fix it) I guess that is the audience's fault for assuming that these men were intellectuals and not just academics.
Schiff, you can make answers off the top of your head, but you don't have the data, theory, or intelligence to produce any semblance of a coherent argument. Sims and Sargent both have papers pertaining to finance and macro. They can be found on their websites
feel free to peruse them, and in the unlikely scenario that you can understand them, please tell us, in your expert opinion, whether they correctly address the issues you profess to understand.
Sims is a poor speaker and was clearly just being cautious in responding. His research focus is macroeconometrics, more relevant to discussions about statistical methods and long-run policy than sound bites about "fixes" to the financial crisis. In any case, his IQ is much higher than Schiff's, and the fact that he couldn't produce a one-line response testifies to the fact that the current recession IS a complicated issue with many "solutions," and anyone claiming otherwise is full of shit.
@woweifj You do realize that a discussion of IQ is a complete non sequitor here, right? As it tends to measure pattern recognition, rather than understanding of macro econometrics. However being that it involves pattern recognition, a working Austrian economist would very likely score very well on it.
IQ is relevant in any discussion about someone's intellectual merit. And how did you determine that Austrian economists have been more influential in macroeconometrics than either Sargent or Sims? As you seem to know, they have produced few rigorous, useful theoretical models and even less convincing empirical evidence of their ad-hoc behavioral explanations. No one in the top 20% of the profession takes Austrians seriously
Lybia, and don't bother saying it was NATO which invaded their air space and blocked their air forced because American controls NATO, America is the biggest terrorist country in the world.
Its ok because blacks and mexicans are taking over, they can't organize a piss up in a brewry, chances are they will chimp out once all the whites there are a minority, and save us all the headache of having to put up with you and your Jewish masters.
You mean you couldn't be bothered looking back at a conversation two others made so you decided to make a marxist degenerate comment, and attach it to a non related issue...and pass it off as a legitimate statement.
The ammount of degeneracy you people spew is overwhelming, its a wonder how you people function as living breathing human beings.
@CelticAngloPress It was fun to be insulted in this way. 'Marxist degenerate' has a nice ol' time feel to it : ). And 'spewed degeneracy'... that would be something classic that always included carrots and peas? 'You people' is another. Funny guy! You still have 'faggot', 'cheeseball', or 'motherf***' and a whole lot more simplified vocabulary you can use. Go on: try another insult. Make my day. Please.
Since it is given that they have obviously studied the subject matter,has anyone wondered why they wouldn't comment? I can hear the band playing on the Titanic...
@shamgar348 yes that may actually be the reason they didn't answer. Perhaps they are not allowed to speak the truth, or they may feel people can't handle the truth. However it looked more like they just weren't prepared and it was a painful and shameful conference.
@shamgar348 My guess is that they simply can't explain it in simple words. Which proves they do not see the larger picture like the Austrians do. Keynesians see the economy as one big experiment where you look at formulas and numbers and keep trying things in order to stimulate. So ask them a specific statistic and they probably can look it up and explain what it means. But ask them about what's actually going on and they are just as clueless as any average Joe.
Now that’s what I call economic science. And they got proper prizes for it. FOR YOUR KNOWLEDGE: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS. There are 5 Nobel Prizes: Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature and Peace. The prize in economic sciences is no more a Nobel Prize than it is a Congressional Gold Medal.
IGNOBEL-10.ECO. PRIZE: The executives and directors of Goldman Sachs, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Magnetar for creating and promoting new ways to invest money — ways that maximize financial gain and minimize financial risk for the world economy, or for a portion thereof. IGNOBEL-08. ECO. PRIZE. Geoffrey Miller, Joshua Tybur and Brent Jordan of the University of New Mexico, USA, for discovering that professional lap dancers earn higher tips when they are ovulating.
You have got to wonder if the Nobel Laureates ever ride New Jersey Transit and take a look out the window of the train at all the abandoned factories that are the wreckage of industrial America. When you view mile after mile of buildings where thousands of people worked, that now are in ruins with all the windows knocked out of them, you might eventually get the impression that industrial production in the USA is in deep trouble.
and frankly, schiff most likely hasn't done anything to help overcome the crisis apart from paying taxes. these people have dedicated their whole life to come a small step closer to an answer, and this is how the mass media thank them. They don't deserve that. if Newton or Einstein had lived today they'd probably have been to scared to get trolled by idiotic youtube reporters.
According to this they tried to find out whether these factors are related, not how to solve a single financial crisis. It's about our entire system.
Another example: when DNA was discovered it offered new possibilities and it was revolutionary as well, but the same people that see Schiff as a prophet complain that we still can't heal DNA-dependend cancer. Maybe it looks like a small step to you, but how do you know?
well, they never claimed that they have finished solutions, from what I read about their studies. Once again, the Newton analogy: there are hundreds of books about gravity, but none of them will give you a satisfying answer where it comes from or why it exists. Newton himself used it as evidence for God. The obvious problem of our current crisis is that we all are living beyond our means, but no reasonable person wants to change that.
yes dan ..if it WAS a conference on nuclear physics AND they couldnt be bothered to to even comment on the growing debacle of iranian nukes ,i would feel that they were both useless AND cowardly ..seriously , it would appear that a nobel prize for economics is as useful and valid as one earned in alchemy or astrology ..
@woodenmajor [if it WAS a conference on nuclear physics AND they couldnt be bothered to to even comment on the growing debacle of iranian nukes ,i would feel that they were both useless AND cowardly]
This is hilarious! So a physicist working on the particle accelerator at CERN should be expected to comment on Iran and the validity of the recent IAEA report? Too funny.
Expressing complex arguments in succinct language is not dumbing down. It is a true test of the rigour of your arguments. Problem is strip away a lot of pretentious jargon and maths and you are actually left with ... what? These people should have an opinion on important macroeconomic policy questions and should be able to express it.
@simonsmatthew I don't know every detail of their work, but imagine they wrote 300 pages and each page is full of 100 reasons of the same value. These works carry more meaning than one can deliver in a few sentences, that's what they got the prize for. For the very same reason every attempt to summarize a work like The Great Gatsby (which is about the beauty of writing itself) is determined to fail. You simply need the complete image. I challenge you to read their work and summarize it properly.
@50sKingJet Point taken. However Keynes during the Great Depression, even with all his writing had a simple answer when needed for policy makers to run with: spend. Why? Because you can have sustained disequilibrium in the markets? Why? Well THEN go and read. He did not just say things like "run a computer model or 80 per cent of (lesser)economists also say...". And then "dont know the impact of my work on South America" - well of course there was none.This press conference was pathetic.
@simonsmatthew That's because times are more complicated. Just compare how easy it was for Newton to talk about gravity and after 2 centuries Einstein brought up the relativity theory. It has often been written that there were only 2 people in the audience when he gave his first speech that really understood what he was talking about. And still, we all know E=mc2 but only few of us understand what it means, and nobody asks a question like "so how does lightspeed affect the African continent?"
@50sKingJet No I don't think so. It is just that we are going to have to wait until things get as bad as the Great Depression before someone is going to come up with something radically new. The 1920s and the years leading up to it were a very complex and messy time indeed - ask any historian. Schiff is right. These guys do not have new solutions to new (or in fact old) problems. And I think there is strong grounds to believe that their work is unlikely to even lead to such.
just because they won't dumb it all down and simplify it for you doesn't make them stupid. And I'm sure nobody will come up with a better, uncomplicated answer - there are already lots of economy experts in your goverment who would do all for a complicated, WORKING answer. You're so naive and anti elitist that it really insults my intellect to continue watching this.And by the way, our economy is global, we all depend on each other. The financial crisis just showed that.
if they state some plain perception and predictions that turn out to be wrong it will help people to realize that having a nobel prize does not make you a better forecaster of economic scenarios than the next guy
Peter is right about 90% of the time. But he keeps saying gold somehow is money per the Constitution?? BS. Peter has gold on his brain. Get off it Peter... In the mean time, there is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
are you saying that they actually DID give a coherent answer to the question some where else in during the conference ...i mean , other than their opinions on this rather pressing matter ,who really gives a crap WHAT they had to say ....i found their "deer in the headlights " response ,somewhat bewildering ,at best
....what ? the US economy ? why would WE be prepared to talk about such an arcane ,peripheral and unimportant issue ? ..we really want to discuss snooky and mike on "jersey shore"
@woodenmajor Did you understand my video game analogy?
"are you saying that they actually DID give a coherent answer ...some where else...conference"
Yes, and I told you where to look.
"other than ...this rather pressing matter ,who really gives a crap WHAT they had to say"
Well, economists obviously. You are only miffed b/c you THINK you can relate to it and want them to say something you can understand. You would not be miffed if this were for Nuclear Physics and they spoke like eggheads.
schiff has 9 minutes to make a point and his point is obviously valid ,these guys had NO IDEA that someone might ask a question about the current US economy ...really ? ...hmmm, lets see ,these are TOP econ professors in US universities and they come to a PRESS conference IN the US during an ongoing economic crisis ....but they hadnt thought that this question MIGHT come up ?
@woodenmajor If you were being honored for a revolutionary way to design video games, would you want to comment on the playing characteristics of "Grand Theft Auto"? Even if you had an opinion?
Sims first answer was not the best but Schiff's video is a hatchet job.
Watch "Princeton news conference with Nobel Prize in economics winners"
These guys had a LOT to say; even if the reporters were uninformed. The questions only seemed relevant b/c it is all "economics".
Schiff played them for laughs. If you are interested in something more, see the full video. Sargeant actually gives a very insightful answer about Europe which gives an inkling as to the breadth and depth of his analysis.
Every socialist should learn about Keynesian inflationary policy. You print money like a madman, you make prices go up. No taxation you say? You're being taxed because over time your savings go down thanks to the SOCIALIST Federal Reserve. Thanks to Obama. Yes, Obama is taxing the poor. Obama hates the poor. Keynesian macroeconomics FUCKS the poor. It screws the poor the hardest. Down with Keynesian. Keynesianism is a failure. Research the Federal Reserve, Fractional Reserve Banking, etc.
I'm half way through the interview and some of the things Thomas Sargent said was true. He talked about how to stop hyperinflation at 23:44. "The way you start it is you get fiscal policy out of control, run sustained deficits, and you have a monetary authority that has to monetize gov't debt, that will always work. How do you stop hyperinflation -- stop doing it." Christopher Sims praised Bernanke... who by Thomas's explanation of hyperinflation is exactly what Bernanke is doing to us!
@sga86 [Christopher Sims praised Bernanke... who by Thomas's explanation of hyperinflation is exactly what Bernanke is doing to us!]
The "praise" for Bernanke is ambiguous at best. In the context of the topic, I interpreted Sims comment as an endorsement of Bernanke calling for fiscal responsibility. There was nothing in either of their comments to suggest they support quantitative easing. Note Sargeant's comment about breaking "incredible" promises.
Anyone actually watched the press conference? Both questions have actually been answered by the two Professors. However, knowing that it is not their topic of specialisation, they asked for caution. Of cause Peter Schiff doesn't understand that, since he knows the ultimate truth. ;)
3. You see men fishing in a boat that is drifting 100 ft toward a dam. You would:
a. I would warn them that their boat is drifting too close to the dam.
b. I'm an economist. It's not fair to ask me a question about what to do.
c. 100 ft is not very close to the dam. I would not warn them.
d. I would not warn them. Anything I would say to them about their situation would be too complicated and take so long that they would be over the edge before I finished talking.
These economists are professors who were given essay questions. Multiple choice would be better.
1.Give the name of a political leader who you think has the best ideas about improving this economy.
a. name of this person _______
b I can't answer this question because the answer is too complicated.
c. political leader?
2. What rate of inflation is too high? a. 2% b. 3% c. 4% d. 5% e. 10% f. If it takes a truckload of $100 bills to buy a jar of peanut butter no problem. I know the right people.
What is the point of all this? If they're going to sit there dumbfounded after every question why doesn't everyone just walk out? Couldn't they all go home? Doesn't anyone in that room have better things to do? And what the FUCK is so damn funny?! These morons sit behind that table acting like the Oracle of Delphi and the audience thinks their blatant, utter stupidity is entertaining and cute?! Give me a break...how sick.
@closer71 "These morons sit behind that table acting like the Oracle of Delphi and the audience thinks their blatant, utter stupidity is entertaining and cute?! Give me a break...how sick."
Unlike most of the commenters here, the audience actually has a clue as to why they won the Nobel Prize. The entertainment factor comes from the fact that the reporters questions are inappropriate (2 steps removed) and the audience (mostly Princeton and NYU econ students is my guess) knows it.
Your setup mischaracterizes what's going on during this press conference. This conference was the day of the announcement that these two won the Nobel prize. They were there to answer questions about winning the Nobel prize and their body of research, not prepared to answer questions about the economy.
@wjb45958 "Your setup mischaracterizes what's going on during this press conference...They were there to answer questions about winning the Nobel prize..."
Exactly. Unfortunately, most viewers do not realize this. Schiff has generated tremendous ill will towards these two men needlessly.
How do you know most viewers don't realize this? I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask men such as this in an environment such as this about the economy. They are supposedly great minds in the field, and any advice or chance to get their opinions on policy should be exercised, and a press conference, regardless of its apparent purpose, is the perfect venue.
@eits1986 [How do you know most viewers don't realize this?]
That is readily apparent from the percentage of uninformed and borderline moronic responses here.
As I have stated here before...
They were awarded a prize for the equivalence of creating a new methodology for building diagnostic medical tools. Would YOU ask such a person how a particular patient (e.g. USA, Europe) is doing? The questions were uninformed which explains their reluctance to answer them.
@eits1986 [any advice or chance to get their opinions on policy should be exercised]
As it turns out, Sargeant actually gave a very insightful answer re: the EU by comparing it to the 13 colonies. But anyone basing their opinion of these two men on this Schiff reputation-smearing video would be clueless.
I cant believe this bullshit that is going on in america. The stink is unbearable. Thank you shiff for exposing them.
mrlush123 5 days ago 3
Are these guys stoned?
portlandgeek 1 week ago
Jesus, is everyone here still in that age where you thumb up every comment you agree with and thumb down every comment you disagree with?
aguyyaknow 1 week ago
How did F.A. Hayek win the nobel prize? I guess everything wasn't so biased and insane in the 70's.
jneil2007 1 week ago
Didn't obama win one of these? They should rename it "The Nobel War Prize".
quidnick 1 week ago
Did they get the right guys up there?
Maybe they just grabbed some old people off the street and shoved them up on stage saying "Answer questions about the economy, go go!"
isair81 1 week ago
You silence a Nobel economist by showing them Alex Gheg's video. The logical flaws of the neoclassical theory are exposed by asking two simple questions. What is quality? What is convenience? youtube.com/watch?v=2c4mvGekYZY
IlirMr 2 weeks ago
@IlirMr I don't see how this exposes a flaw in anything, since one of the points in neoclassicism is that value, whether by quality, quantity or convenience is always up to the purchaser, and that none of the modalities used in economics are ever absolutely true in a real world setting, where no one can possibly predict the vast variety of reasons why a consumer does something. This was a good video, but I don't think it refutes what you think it does. If anything, it reinforces it.
bjlayd61 2 weeks ago
Never forget, the Nobel PEACE Prize was awarded to a president who held wars in more than 3 countries...
DaveTheTuberx 2 weeks ago
I don't know what to say... so, um, yeah.
MrFreeCookie 2 weeks ago
Hold on now, what do you expect them to say? Do you expect them to bring some kind of mastersolution? I´m sure they´ve thought about the US economy at some point. But how do you even answer a question like that?
aguyyaknow 2 weeks ago 2
@aguyyaknow He could answer the question with something rather than NOTHING!
See Sims' whole statement. He says the gov't must create conditions for long term growth without upsetting short term growth. NO SHIT. Ask me how the Vancouver Canucks could have won the Stanley cup and I say "they should have score more goals than the other team", would I get the Nobel prize in hockey strategy?
Austrian economics does not lean on data like a crutch, but it is validated by the data.
SkormFlinxingGlock 2 weeks ago
@SkormFlinxingGlock
Let´s extend that metaphor. Let´s say that you were asked how to win a major hockey-game. Exactly what kind of answer do you think SHOULD earn you an award? Some kind of movement strategy? Tips on how to hold the stick? Giving a precise description of how to exercise? Most such answer would probably turn into shit if people tested them. These kinds of question are simply too complicated to be answered in the precise in-depth way that you seem to be asking for.
aguyyaknow 2 weeks ago
@aguyyaknow is that sacarism?
qing333 1 week ago
@qing333
I am going to assume you are responding to that comment in the category "top rated". Sorry if I´m wrong but I´ve written several comments to this video due to discussions.
No, it´s not sarcasm, I mean it very much. The question "how do you solve the US-economy" is, in laymans terms, really f#cking difficult to answer. In fact, there may not even be an answer.
aguyyaknow 1 week ago
@aguyyaknow
Are you kidding me? Hes clearly just not giving his opinion on purpose... its not that hes dumb, hes trying to keep the conference apolitical
Everett345 1 week ago
@aguyyaknow I would expect him to at least throw out some solutions, like those 2nd graders :)
quidnick 1 week ago
@quidnick
Unless you expect him to "throw out some solutions" for at least two or three hours then he would have to give the reporters a false answer.
aguyyaknow 1 week ago
@aguyyaknow Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't Nobel Prizes usually reserved for those who actually do have answers to questions.
Schredder222 2 days ago
@Schredder222
Sure they are, but some questions are really bloody difficult no matter what kind of brainiac you are. Imagine that you could travel back through time and ask George Orwell how to run a country, or Oscar Wilde how to live your life, don´t you think that they would be stumped for a while? Personally I think they would need quite some time to think of a proper answer. Now imagine that on top of the complexity there´s also an entire world watching you. You get my point, right?
aguyyaknow 2 days ago
That's why the Right Livelihood Award is a much better alternative to the Nobel Prize...
...but this still doesn't validate something as stupid as Austrian economics.
It's worth noting that a stupid charlatan economist like Milton Friedman also received the Nobel Prize. His ideology7 is the Chicago School of economics, which is simply an off-shoot of the Austrian School- which is just total & complete nonsense!
TeaPartyTerroristss 2 weeks ago 2
@TeaPartyTerroristss Milton Friedman is the opposite of these guys. Short, direct, understandable answers. Look anywhere on Youtube for his opinions. No one to my knowledge has ever properly rebutted his views, they simply ignore him and create Newer Deals.
winmine0327 2 weeks ago
@winmine0327, that's the problem. Some issues, like economics, are a lot more complex than what an academic charlatan like Friedman, Hayek, or Mises would explain through "arguments" that are based on absolutely nothing but philosophical conjecture, false axiom systems, & flawed a priori assumptions. There's someting called NUANCE that many libertarians don't seem to grasp. The economic problems in the US are multifaceted. You can't just scapegoat the FED or spending & expect it to be realistic.
TeaPartyTerroristss 2 weeks ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss I simply want to impress on you the idea that Friedman did not simply demagoguery, but had knowledge of the history he based his ideas off of. I can't speak for him in a youtube comment but look for his 'Free to Choose' debates to get a better idea of him.
winmine0327 2 weeks ago
@winmine0327, oh please! I used to be a libertarian for many years before I changed my mind on that whole realm of philosophical, economic, & political thought! What Friedman presented in all his works is a misinterpretation of historical facts- if not outright historical revisionism! He negelects to mention several major factors that actually would poke huge holes in his "logic. When I alluded to demagoguery of the FED, I was mostly pointing to today's most ardent proponents of libertarianism
TeaPartyTerroristss 2 weeks ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss The whole point that economists like Hayek tried to convey is just that-- that the economy is too complex for any one to understand beyond a micro level of their own needs, resources, etc. Attempting to go beyond this and direct the economy where you want it to go from a larger level is what's made the US economy so tangled up and distorted.
bjlayd61 2 weeks ago
@bjlayd61 Perfect comment.
415Dub 2 weeks ago
@bjlayd61 yes I know. I'm a former libertarain. The problem with that is it's like saying that even if you get up into a helicopter to look at the state of a forest fire, you still won't be able to ascertain how large it is. Or even if you have setellite imaging showing you the extent of the damage, you still don't know what's going on. The problem with this school of thought is that facts can be staring you in the FACE & you STILL could play dumb just so you can cling to flawed ideology.
TeaPartyTerroristss 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss Soooo...how about those Greeks?
tmoallen 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss Free Markets>
415Dub 2 weeks ago
@415Dub the only problem is that free markets have never existed any time in history of human kind & they never will exist.
The definition of "free market" changes from person to person, often times according to the expediency of the advocate's philosophical bias.
In truth, there have never in the history of human kind been a single country in recorded history that has developed successfully through adaherence to free market principles. Not the USA, not Hong Kong, & not even Singapore.
FuckPropertyRights 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss
Impressive use of the word "stupid" twice, combined with "nonsense" - all about the Austrian Economics. You really, really don't have anything in your bag besides hot air and Keynesian social engineering, do you?
MrSnielsson 1 week ago
@MrSnielsson
As I've said, Keynesians = communist central-planners
tjtomkins 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss Soooo...how bout that national debt?
tmoallen 1 week ago
@tmoallen
I'm sure Keynesian "TeaPartyTerroristss" will suggest that government spend even more & raise the debt even more to "stimulate the economy" (aka INFLATION) until the hell breaks loose
Keynesians nearly always have one solution - "create" more money (& inflation obviously) - economy is doing well then create more money, economy is doing bad then create more money, same stupid "solution", & of course, politicians & bankers that get to create it are all good while people suffer
tjtomkins 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss - I feel so informed after reading your aptly put piece about "stupid" Austrian theory, complete with sources and arguments of course. Chicago school an offshoot of Austrian theory? Really? Read some Hayek and Rothbard and you'll find not only that you've been misinformed, but that the only total and complete nonsense here is in fact your comment...
jone4700 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss
Austrian Economics is WAY better than the ever useless Keynesian Economics which has failed MISERABLY allover the globe, bred by a person who explained away booms & busts with "animal spirits"; if Keynesians can't even pinpoint the cause properly then no wonder they've no answers, the ONLY reason Keynesian Economics took off because politicians & bankers loved the idea of "creating money" out of thin air; Keynesianism = COMMUNIST CENTRAL-PLANNING
tjtomkins 1 week ago
@TeaPartyTerroristss Sir! Milton Friedman is. NOT. STUPD!@#$ D':
hawbster 1 week ago
this is the problem with austrian economics. no validation of empirical data.
halflifeproductionz 3 weeks ago
@halflifeproductionz Nonsense. What you need to understand is that data doesn't tell you anything on a larger scale. You can have data showing that your economy is great, and at the same time the economy could be on the last day before a total collapse. Austrians focus on an actual theory that includes data, but puts it into perspective.
TWSceptic 2 weeks ago
@halflifeproductionz Austrian economics is validated by empirical data, it's just not it's basis. It's basis is a series of principles derived a priori that are necessarily implied by particular actions. For example if two people are voluntarily exchanging something then they necessarily value what they are getting over what they are giving. It may turn out that they were wrong to value it more, but in that moment it describes an axiom austrian economics base other principles on.
blapgatify 2 weeks ago
FYI: Most professors are dumb as fuck.
ThamelasStormrage 3 weeks ago
This radialist um puping from his mouth
Rodneyrorro 3 weeks ago
Wow! Now an economist who thinks/knows about the economy has become an unreasonable expectation.
jla3rd 3 weeks ago
oh please. i have a response for dad. ASK MY DAD HE'LL HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY
piecharthosen 3 weeks ago
Mr. Friedman would definitely have something to say about usa's economy...
piecharthosen 3 weeks ago
HAHAHA everything is funny, my god people in America are getting stupider and gullible each day . The economy is going to shit, but these people came to see an entertainment show.
blaugot 4 weeks ago
So, what the FUCK did they answer?....
BennyIceEyes 1 month ago
Pathetic times.
PrivateAckbar 1 month ago in playlist More videos from SchiffReport
This video is really misleading. I watched the entire press conference and right after Christopher Sims says that preface about having to crunch numbers to assess the US government's treatment of the current events, he actually GIVES his own opinion, which was completely cut out of this video. If you watch the whole thing, these Nobel Prize winners actually know a lot about the economy. Who would have ever guessed this?
louiscarruthers 1 month ago
@louiscarruthers Not surprising. One of the common trait of right wing extremism is to discredit academics and intellectuals. From Umberto Eco's "Eternal Fascism" [Fascists use terms like]' "degenerate intellectuals," "eggheads," "effete snobs," and "universities are nests of reds." '
Just looking at the comments from Schiff supporters, you'd think Eco was talking about them.
gnomechomskylives 3 weeks ago
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, Schiff is just completely flabbergasted, so jokes
MeansofSurvival 1 month ago
The two comments below, quoted from Princeton's website, outline the two laureates' area of work for which they were being honored. I had hoped that the information might shed light on the reason they could not answer the questions from the audience but, as best as I could interpret, it does not. The link for the quoted text is here: princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S31/82/88E23/
mumbles005 1 month ago
Nobel Memorial Prize for their work in answering "questions regarding the causal relationship between economic policy and different macroeconomic variables such as GDP (gross domestic product), inflation, employment and investments."
mumbles005 1 month ago
"Economic-policy decisions are influenced by expectations about developments in the private sector. The laureates' methods can be applied to identify these causal relationships and explain the role of expectations. This makes it possible to ascertain the effects of unexpected policy measures as well as systematic policy shifts."
mumbles005 1 month ago
So...So...Uhh..I don't know. LOL
frkelsa 1 month ago
It is reasonable for the questioner to assume that such economists would have already prepared the analysis..
mason72518 1 month ago
That golden, Peter.
BTW, that's a terrible shirt :)
evilzzzable 1 month ago
This makes me sad. What were they there for? I am convinced that these people are not as stupid as this clip makes them seem, even though I agree with Schiff on most of the issues. It truly baffles me, this.
NKirkwall 1 month ago 3
they are smart enough to know that they know nothing.
that's a good start, as opposed to the US professors.
myrelative 1 month ago in playlist Weitere Videos von SchiffReport
lol @ the title
Chacha5678 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The economic clowns from whom the government circus gets advice...
do123go 1 month ago
Comment removed
do123go 1 month ago
The clips of the Nobel Prize winners are very disturbing. It's scary how dumb people have become, and how much recognition and prestige is worth, even if it means nothing.
LogSNES 1 month ago
I don't think the economist did anything wrong. Friedrich Hayek, in his Nobel Prize Banquet Speech said he was against giving Nobel Prize in Economics because "[...] the Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess". In a world where no single man knows how to make a pencil, any person (even a prize-winning economist) can't speak knowledgeably. I think Christopher Sims understood it quite well.
AmbujSaxena 2 months ago
@AmbujSaxena Yes. Hayek very much based his support for markets on the notion that markets know what no individual or organisation knows... and that would apply to the best economists too. However sometimes it is hard to see wisdom in what some markets do, and easier to see the work of chaos.
SteffanLlwyd 2 months ago
These Nobel Prize winners are an embarrassment. They can't even answer a question about the US economy. Instead, they stare blackly at each other while being laughed at by the audience. These people are pathetic, and anyone that defends them is also pathetic.
TheResistanceV 2 months ago
@woweifj the idea that you need mathematical modeling for economics is based on the flawed premise that a complicated system that includes numbers must necessarily have some mathematical motor. If that were true, Keynesian ideas would ALWAYS work. The truth is economics is more closely related to the field of psychology than mathematical modeling.
TheNickFox 2 months ago
@TheNickFox
How does that imply that Keynesian ideas always work? Keynes himself seldom wrote in mathematically precise language, and his ideas weren't formalized using rational models until the Lucas Critique came about. Math in economics has nothing to do with aligning with certain ideology, but it is the only tool with which you can rigorously frame your ideas in a scientific way. Even the "psychology" and behavioral aspects you refer to must be formalized to be taken seriously.
woweifj 2 months ago
are they for real?
exactly why did they win this award?
im starting to ? just how good the over all education system in the usa is
the ONLY good education we seem to have are trade schools where actually learn a trade
dagobaker 2 months ago
Obviously they don't want to say what they think.
Prometheus4096 2 months ago
The one in the middle reminds me of Bob Newhart
fightinirish1211 2 months ago
A simple answer is hard to come by when you make your living writing research papers like "A 9 Variable Probabilistic Macroeconomic Forecasting Model" or "ARMA Index Modeling as Estimation in Infinite Dimensional Parameter Space". What a dolt.
mrfresh976 2 months ago
Peter Schiff is an idiot beyond belief! All of his comments and interpretations just prove how little gray matter he was endowed with. It's a surprise he even went to college. But bashing noble laureates does get you extra listeners on the radio, I guess. The truth is that there are no "right" answers, just as Sims suggested in his reply. If there was a simple method or answer to questions like "what is the right policy to raise employment?", then we would know these answers already!
arodnyansky 2 months ago
@arodnyansky You're wrong. Sims was too dumbfounded to blurt out even that there are no simple answers. He couldn't say one intelligible thing about monetary policy, fiscal policy, private or public debt, unemployment, etc. His response was, derp, well, I'd have to look at the data and gosh, you don't think I can come up with anything off the top of my head, don'tcha.
mrfresh976 2 months ago
@arodnyansky Without knowing much about you, I can already tell that it's not mr. Schiff who is the idiot here, but you. mr. Schiff actually understands economics like it should be understood. Very few people come even close to his level of understanding.
What you need to understand, is that Nobel Price these days means absolutely nothing. In recent years there has been a high "inflation" meaning the value of the people receiving the price has been declining sharply. Obama is a perfect example.
TWSceptic 2 months ago
@arodnyansky No right answers? No one is asking for a simple answer, but in a nutshell. Agree or disagree about the ongoing policies implemented by our glorious leaders. This is just plain embarrassing to even watch. As for Nobel laureates, have you researched Long-Term Capital Management? You should.
RGT88 2 months ago
@RGT88
Yes, and while you're at it, please ask physicists to explain string theory "in a nutshell" to an audience with no mathematical training. How useful would that be?
LTCM's failure was, in large part, brought about by bad luck. Instead of hiding behind the fact that Bob Merton was on the board of a sinking hedge fund, perhaps you should focus on your flimsy argument about why the economics Nobel prize has been misappropriated and why Sims' (or even Bob Merton's) work is not deserving.
woweifj 2 months ago
@woweifj Don't compare complicated physics with straightforward economics. Here's a newsflash; I got a degree in Economics and if I were to apply majority of the theories I have learned, I'd be broke. Peter Schiff is an idiot? Yes the "failure" of his business speaks volumes. What have you done with your life? LTCM was bad luck? Yes of course, that's the point! The inherent non-linearity of life and low probability, high-impact events. Man, I'm hungover and responding to you made me feel better.
RGT88 2 months ago
@RGT88
Your BA does not make you an expert. What economic theory do you know beyond basic supply and demand arguments provided in Econ 101 textbooks? Complicated physics and straightforward economics?Tell me the difference between the MCMC methods or PDE's used in physics and those in economics. The fact that you proclaim the "inherent non-linearity of life [and low prob events]" to be great insight indicates that you're a high-schooler or scrub business major who's never opened an econ journal
woweifj 2 months ago
@arodnyansky Do you actually do research or do you just suppose your assumptions are gospel truth? Please read up on Austrian economics before coming back to comment. There are answers out there, but the fact of the matter is most politicians are ignorant of them. Additionally, without using major modeling, there isn't much money to be made by being an Austrian economist, so the ones who do it as a career tend to be Keynesians.
TheNickFox 2 months ago
I'm sure they foolishly thought the reporters would do their homework, and ask questions about their research and areas of expertise.
TheCSFive 2 months ago
@TheCSFive That's like having Jesus in front of you, as asking him to describe his favorite miracle to you. You don't want a synopsis of their work, you want to ask questions that pertain to you. (IE. What is the meaning of life; why do bad things happen to good people; what caused the collapse; how can we fix it) I guess that is the audience's fault for assuming that these men were intellectuals and not just academics.
TheNickFox 2 months ago
Schiff, you can make answers off the top of your head, but you don't have the data, theory, or intelligence to produce any semblance of a coherent argument. Sims and Sargent both have papers pertaining to finance and macro. They can be found on their websites
feel free to peruse them, and in the unlikely scenario that you can understand them, please tell us, in your expert opinion, whether they correctly address the issues you profess to understand.
woweifj 2 months ago
Comment removed
norskemann1 2 months ago
@woweifj Ahh, Ad Hominem. Much respect to you man
norskemann1 2 months ago
Sims is a poor speaker and was clearly just being cautious in responding. His research focus is macroeconometrics, more relevant to discussions about statistical methods and long-run policy than sound bites about "fixes" to the financial crisis. In any case, his IQ is much higher than Schiff's, and the fact that he couldn't produce a one-line response testifies to the fact that the current recession IS a complicated issue with many "solutions," and anyone claiming otherwise is full of shit.
woweifj 2 months ago
@woweifj You do realize that a discussion of IQ is a complete non sequitor here, right? As it tends to measure pattern recognition, rather than understanding of macro econometrics. However being that it involves pattern recognition, a working Austrian economist would very likely score very well on it.
TheNickFox 2 months ago
@TheNickFox
IQ is relevant in any discussion about someone's intellectual merit. And how did you determine that Austrian economists have been more influential in macroeconometrics than either Sargent or Sims? As you seem to know, they have produced few rigorous, useful theoretical models and even less convincing empirical evidence of their ad-hoc behavioral explanations. No one in the top 20% of the profession takes Austrians seriously
woweifj 2 months ago
Obama got a nobel "peace" prize and he invaded more countries.
All you need to know to understand, is ww2 revisionism, and research the frankfurt school of intellectuals.
FIN.
CelticAngloPress 2 months ago
@CelticAngloPress keep doing work !!! respect
PolakFury 2 months ago
@CelticAngloPress Which countries did Obama invade?
SteffanLlwyd 2 months ago
@SteffanLlwyd Libya, Yemen, Uganda...
idricool 2 months ago
@SteffanLlwyd
Lybia, and don't bother saying it was NATO which invaded their air space and blocked their air forced because American controls NATO, America is the biggest terrorist country in the world.
Its ok because blacks and mexicans are taking over, they can't organize a piss up in a brewry, chances are they will chimp out once all the whites there are a minority, and save us all the headache of having to put up with you and your Jewish masters.
One less hurdle.
CelticAngloPress 2 months ago
@CelticAngloPress After 'Libyia' I couldn't follow what you were saying.
SteffanLlwyd 2 months ago
@SteffanLlwyd
You mean you couldn't be bothered looking back at a conversation two others made so you decided to make a marxist degenerate comment, and attach it to a non related issue...and pass it off as a legitimate statement.
The ammount of degeneracy you people spew is overwhelming, its a wonder how you people function as living breathing human beings.
CelticAngloPress 2 months ago
@CelticAngloPress It was fun to be insulted in this way. 'Marxist degenerate' has a nice ol' time feel to it : ). And 'spewed degeneracy'... that would be something classic that always included carrots and peas? 'You people' is another. Funny guy! You still have 'faggot', 'cheeseball', or 'motherf***' and a whole lot more simplified vocabulary you can use. Go on: try another insult. Make my day. Please.
SteffanLlwyd 2 months ago
@CelticAngloPress
The economics and peace recipients are picked by two completely separate committees. Why is that difficult for you to understand?
woweifj 2 months ago
Since it is given that they have obviously studied the subject matter,has anyone wondered why they wouldn't comment? I can hear the band playing on the Titanic...
shamgar348 3 months ago 3
@shamgar348 yes that may actually be the reason they didn't answer. Perhaps they are not allowed to speak the truth, or they may feel people can't handle the truth. However it looked more like they just weren't prepared and it was a painful and shameful conference.
TWSceptic 2 months ago
@shamgar348 My guess is that they simply can't explain it in simple words. Which proves they do not see the larger picture like the Austrians do. Keynesians see the economy as one big experiment where you look at formulas and numbers and keep trying things in order to stimulate. So ask them a specific statistic and they probably can look it up and explain what it means. But ask them about what's actually going on and they are just as clueless as any average Joe.
TWSceptic 2 weeks ago
"This Nobel Prize winner in Economics. He didn't even have that! He didn't even have glow in the dark pants!" -Peter Schiff
Best quote of the video.
radioschizo 3 months ago 3
Now that’s what I call economic science. And they got proper prizes for it. FOR YOUR KNOWLEDGE: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS. There are 5 Nobel Prizes: Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature and Peace. The prize in economic sciences is no more a Nobel Prize than it is a Congressional Gold Medal.
BERD1958 3 months ago
IGNOBEL-10.ECO. PRIZE: The executives and directors of Goldman Sachs, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Magnetar for creating and promoting new ways to invest money — ways that maximize financial gain and minimize financial risk for the world economy, or for a portion thereof. IGNOBEL-08. ECO. PRIZE. Geoffrey Miller, Joshua Tybur and Brent Jordan of the University of New Mexico, USA, for discovering that professional lap dancers earn higher tips when they are ovulating.
BERD1958 3 months ago
You have got to wonder if the Nobel Laureates ever ride New Jersey Transit and take a look out the window of the train at all the abandoned factories that are the wreckage of industrial America. When you view mile after mile of buildings where thousands of people worked, that now are in ruins with all the windows knocked out of them, you might eventually get the impression that industrial production in the USA is in deep trouble.
MX3516 3 months ago
Peter Schiff you are THE MAN!
Those guys are pathetic
Jazzper79 3 months ago 2
and frankly, schiff most likely hasn't done anything to help overcome the crisis apart from paying taxes. these people have dedicated their whole life to come a small step closer to an answer, and this is how the mass media thank them. They don't deserve that. if Newton or Einstein had lived today they'd probably have been to scared to get trolled by idiotic youtube reporters.
50sKingJet 3 months ago
@50sKingJet
ever been in a room with a economist?
00Billy 3 months ago
@00Billy yes. saying no wouldnt make my points less valid though.
50sKingJet 3 months ago
@50sKingJet
hehe you're right....know Carl Bass ? enjoy..
/watch?v=K-F_QF1XTXI&feature=colike
00Billy 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
h t t p : / / w w w . must be added
50sKingJet 3 months ago
nobelprize(dot)org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/2011/press.html
According to this they tried to find out whether these factors are related, not how to solve a single financial crisis. It's about our entire system.
Another example: when DNA was discovered it offered new possibilities and it was revolutionary as well, but the same people that see Schiff as a prophet complain that we still can't heal DNA-dependend cancer. Maybe it looks like a small step to you, but how do you know?
50sKingJet 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
well, they never claimed that they have finished solutions, from what I read about their studies. Once again, the Newton analogy: there are hundreds of books about gravity, but none of them will give you a satisfying answer where it comes from or why it exists. Newton himself used it as evidence for God. The obvious problem of our current crisis is that we all are living beyond our means, but no reasonable person wants to change that.
50sKingJet 3 months ago
The authority figures who run these awards might want to consider changing the name of them from Nobel to Yesbull.
heymisterderp 3 months ago
Haha this is great stuff Peter!
CasualUTubeGuy 3 months ago
yes dan ..if it WAS a conference on nuclear physics AND they couldnt be bothered to to even comment on the growing debacle of iranian nukes ,i would feel that they were both useless AND cowardly ..seriously , it would appear that a nobel prize for economics is as useful and valid as one earned in alchemy or astrology ..
woodenmajor 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@woodenmajor [if it WAS a conference on nuclear physics AND they couldnt be bothered to to even comment on the growing debacle of iranian nukes ,i would feel that they were both useless AND cowardly]
This is hilarious! So a physicist working on the particle accelerator at CERN should be expected to comment on Iran and the validity of the recent IAEA report? Too funny.
danL1011 3 months ago
Expressing complex arguments in succinct language is not dumbing down. It is a true test of the rigour of your arguments. Problem is strip away a lot of pretentious jargon and maths and you are actually left with ... what? These people should have an opinion on important macroeconomic policy questions and should be able to express it.
simonsmatthew 3 months ago
@simonsmatthew I don't know every detail of their work, but imagine they wrote 300 pages and each page is full of 100 reasons of the same value. These works carry more meaning than one can deliver in a few sentences, that's what they got the prize for. For the very same reason every attempt to summarize a work like The Great Gatsby (which is about the beauty of writing itself) is determined to fail. You simply need the complete image. I challenge you to read their work and summarize it properly.
50sKingJet 3 months ago
@50sKingJet Point taken. However Keynes during the Great Depression, even with all his writing had a simple answer when needed for policy makers to run with: spend. Why? Because you can have sustained disequilibrium in the markets? Why? Well THEN go and read. He did not just say things like "run a computer model or 80 per cent of (lesser)economists also say...". And then "dont know the impact of my work on South America" - well of course there was none.This press conference was pathetic.
simonsmatthew 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
@simonsmatthew That's because times are more complicated. Just compare how easy it was for Newton to talk about gravity and after 2 centuries Einstein brought up the relativity theory. It has often been written that there were only 2 people in the audience when he gave his first speech that really understood what he was talking about. And still, we all know E=mc2 but only few of us understand what it means, and nobody asks a question like "so how does lightspeed affect the African continent?"
50sKingJet 3 months ago
@50sKingJet No I don't think so. It is just that we are going to have to wait until things get as bad as the Great Depression before someone is going to come up with something radically new. The 1920s and the years leading up to it were a very complex and messy time indeed - ask any historian. Schiff is right. These guys do not have new solutions to new (or in fact old) problems. And I think there is strong grounds to believe that their work is unlikely to even lead to such.
simonsmatthew 3 months ago
just because they won't dumb it all down and simplify it for you doesn't make them stupid. And I'm sure nobody will come up with a better, uncomplicated answer - there are already lots of economy experts in your goverment who would do all for a complicated, WORKING answer. You're so naive and anti elitist that it really insults my intellect to continue watching this.And by the way, our economy is global, we all depend on each other. The financial crisis just showed that.
50sKingJet 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
Comment removed
50sKingJet 3 months ago
of course they have an opinion.
they just can publicly commit themselves.
if they state some plain perception and predictions that turn out to be wrong it will help people to realize that having a nobel prize does not make you a better forecaster of economic scenarios than the next guy
vjfperez 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Peter is right about 90% of the time. But he keeps saying gold somehow is money per the Constitution?? BS. Peter has gold on his brain. Get off it Peter... In the mean time, there is another guy who just published a book on what everyone who is being taken advantage of can do to get back in the game after having their clocks cleaned... "Money Slaves And Cool Aid"... Get - The - Book dot com (solve the riddle and learn what to do). Good luck pounding it through their thick skulls Peter.
TMIAmerica 3 months ago
did you not realise how much you were dragging this out? You repeated yourself about 20 times
extremepietbh 3 months ago in playlist Videos from SchiffReport
are you saying that they actually DID give a coherent answer to the question some where else in during the conference ...i mean , other than their opinions on this rather pressing matter ,who really gives a crap WHAT they had to say ....i found their "deer in the headlights " response ,somewhat bewildering ,at best
....what ? the US economy ? why would WE be prepared to talk about such an arcane ,peripheral and unimportant issue ? ..we really want to discuss snooky and mike on "jersey shore"
woodenmajor 3 months ago
@woodenmajor Did you understand my video game analogy?
"are you saying that they actually DID give a coherent answer ...some where else...conference"
Yes, and I told you where to look.
"other than ...this rather pressing matter ,who really gives a crap WHAT they had to say"
Well, economists obviously. You are only miffed b/c you THINK you can relate to it and want them to say something you can understand. You would not be miffed if this were for Nuclear Physics and they spoke like eggheads.
danL1011 3 months ago
lmfao
rgs11 3 months ago
schiff has 9 minutes to make a point and his point is obviously valid ,these guys had NO IDEA that someone might ask a question about the current US economy ...really ? ...hmmm, lets see ,these are TOP econ professors in US universities and they come to a PRESS conference IN the US during an ongoing economic crisis ....but they hadnt thought that this question MIGHT come up ?
woodenmajor 3 months ago
@woodenmajor If you were being honored for a revolutionary way to design video games, would you want to comment on the playing characteristics of "Grand Theft Auto"? Even if you had an opinion?
Sims first answer was not the best but Schiff's video is a hatchet job.
Watch "Princeton news conference with Nobel Prize in economics winners"
These guys had a LOT to say; even if the reporters were uninformed. The questions only seemed relevant b/c it is all "economics".
danL1011 3 months ago
"What about Europe?" classic
bigfatgoider 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@bigfatgoider ["What about Europe?" classic]
Schiff played them for laughs. If you are interested in something more, see the full video. Sargeant actually gives a very insightful answer about Europe which gives an inkling as to the breadth and depth of his analysis.
danL1011 3 months ago
Every socialist should learn about Keynesian inflationary policy. You print money like a madman, you make prices go up. No taxation you say? You're being taxed because over time your savings go down thanks to the SOCIALIST Federal Reserve. Thanks to Obama. Yes, Obama is taxing the poor. Obama hates the poor. Keynesian macroeconomics FUCKS the poor. It screws the poor the hardest. Down with Keynesian. Keynesianism is a failure. Research the Federal Reserve, Fractional Reserve Banking, etc.
amamerc 3 months ago
Where here about economics NOT JOKES. BUT THIS SI WHAT THEY'VE BECOME, FUCKING JOKES
HeliosFire9ll 3 months ago
The numbers banned by US presidents
Search For
"BUSH OBAMA DESTROYED US ARMY" Part 6
eliasmouawad 3 months ago
Woooooowwww
bocanutz 3 months ago
I'm half way through the interview and some of the things Thomas Sargent said was true. He talked about how to stop hyperinflation at 23:44. "The way you start it is you get fiscal policy out of control, run sustained deficits, and you have a monetary authority that has to monetize gov't debt, that will always work. How do you stop hyperinflation -- stop doing it." Christopher Sims praised Bernanke... who by Thomas's explanation of hyperinflation is exactly what Bernanke is doing to us!
sga86 3 months ago
@sga86 [Christopher Sims praised Bernanke... who by Thomas's explanation of hyperinflation is exactly what Bernanke is doing to us!]
The "praise" for Bernanke is ambiguous at best. In the context of the topic, I interpreted Sims comment as an endorsement of Bernanke calling for fiscal responsibility. There was nothing in either of their comments to suggest they support quantitative easing. Note Sargeant's comment about breaking "incredible" promises.
danL1011 3 months ago
Ron Paul 2012 for prez. Give Ron Paul one for peace and Peter one for economy!!
sga86 3 months ago
Thanks to Peter for all his knowledge and intelligence.
airspeedaviation 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012 or bust!
acarlisl 4 months ago
The Professor has no clue. Why is this a surprise?
Manoftheswamp 4 months ago
How hasn't peter won one yet? Oh wait, because it's worthless and he needs an award that matters.
canis760 4 months ago
whoa
999PreciousMetals999 4 months ago
Anyone actually watched the press conference? Both questions have actually been answered by the two Professors. However, knowing that it is not their topic of specialisation, they asked for caution. Of cause Peter Schiff doesn't understand that, since he knows the ultimate truth. ;)
SmartPappnase 4 months ago
@SmartPappnase lol
implicico 4 months ago
Hey Schiff you always pronounce Bernanke without the n...you say Bernake...why is that?
winny778 4 months ago
i guess the Nobel laureate group were out to lunch when they gave that guy his prize
lifeisaliewithoutaf 4 months ago
3. You see men fishing in a boat that is drifting 100 ft toward a dam. You would:
a. I would warn them that their boat is drifting too close to the dam.
b. I'm an economist. It's not fair to ask me a question about what to do.
c. 100 ft is not very close to the dam. I would not warn them.
d. I would not warn them. Anything I would say to them about their situation would be too complicated and take so long that they would be over the edge before I finished talking.
rltb5712 4 months ago
These economists are professors who were given essay questions. Multiple choice would be better.
1.Give the name of a political leader who you think has the best ideas about improving this economy.
a. name of this person _______
b I can't answer this question because the answer is too complicated.
c. political leader?
2. What rate of inflation is too high? a. 2% b. 3% c. 4% d. 5% e. 10% f. If it takes a truckload of $100 bills to buy a jar of peanut butter no problem. I know the right people.
rltb5712 4 months ago
An educational video.
rltb5712 4 months ago
What is the point of all this? If they're going to sit there dumbfounded after every question why doesn't everyone just walk out? Couldn't they all go home? Doesn't anyone in that room have better things to do? And what the FUCK is so damn funny?! These morons sit behind that table acting like the Oracle of Delphi and the audience thinks their blatant, utter stupidity is entertaining and cute?! Give me a break...how sick.
closer71 4 months ago
@closer71 "These morons sit behind that table acting like the Oracle of Delphi and the audience thinks their blatant, utter stupidity is entertaining and cute?! Give me a break...how sick."
Unlike most of the commenters here, the audience actually has a clue as to why they won the Nobel Prize. The entertainment factor comes from the fact that the reporters questions are inappropriate (2 steps removed) and the audience (mostly Princeton and NYU econ students is my guess) knows it.
danL1011 4 months ago
Your setup mischaracterizes what's going on during this press conference. This conference was the day of the announcement that these two won the Nobel prize. They were there to answer questions about winning the Nobel prize and their body of research, not prepared to answer questions about the economy.
wjb45958 4 months ago
@wjb45958 "Your setup mischaracterizes what's going on during this press conference...They were there to answer questions about winning the Nobel prize..."
Exactly. Unfortunately, most viewers do not realize this. Schiff has generated tremendous ill will towards these two men needlessly.
danL1011 4 months ago
@danL1011
How do you know most viewers don't realize this? I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask men such as this in an environment such as this about the economy. They are supposedly great minds in the field, and any advice or chance to get their opinions on policy should be exercised, and a press conference, regardless of its apparent purpose, is the perfect venue.
eits1986 3 months ago
@eits1986 [How do you know most viewers don't realize this?]
That is readily apparent from the percentage of uninformed and borderline moronic responses here.
As I have stated here before...
They were awarded a prize for the equivalence of creating a new methodology for building diagnostic medical tools. Would YOU ask such a person how a particular patient (e.g. USA, Europe) is doing? The questions were uninformed which explains their reluctance to answer them.
Schiff played them for fools.
danL1011 3 months ago
@eits1986 [any advice or chance to get their opinions on policy should be exercised]
As it turns out, Sargeant actually gave a very insightful answer re: the EU by comparing it to the 13 colonies. But anyone basing their opinion of these two men on this Schiff reputation-smearing video would be clueless.
danL1011 3 months ago