Reddit reviews Economics For Dummies
We found 17 Reddit comments about Economics For Dummies. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
For Dummies
Reddit reviews Economics For DummiesWe found 17 Reddit comments about Economics For Dummies. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
Economía e inversiones son dos cosas muy distintas. Los libros de economía que leí están en ingles y son:
Una vez que leas y entiendas los tres primeros libros, las inversiones pasan a ser algo mas fácil de entender: como producir valor a partir del aire.
Wenn du mir mit dem kauf einen Gefallen tun willst
Aren't transacting BTC disincentive for its users then?
Great read for you: https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1520547403&sr=8-1&keywords=economics+for+dummies
There is no point going on with someone who doesn't understand the Economics 101 of growing deficits in weak economies while cutting deficits during good economies, like the one Obama left to Trump.
You are fundamentally too economically ignorant to grasp the basic principle when you insist on trying to draw a false equivalence between the idiocy of current growing deficits after the sub 5% unemployment Obama left Trump, and the quite reasonable deficits implemented in the bottom of one of the worst recessions the nation has seen since depression.
I'd suggest an Econ 101 class, or even Economics for Dummies. Your basic lack of fundamental knowledge makes discussion pointless. I'd have more luck discussing quantum physics with a 3 year old.
yes because 500k new immigrants and international """"students"""" each year flooding into vancouver and toronto surely has NOTHING to do with housing demand, and thus equilibrium house prices.
here is some helpful material that you could learn a whole lot from
You mean you want to understand the basics of economics?
I haven't read this particular book myself, but the "for dummies" series have always been very easy to read. So try Economics For Dummies.
I'd recommend Sean Flynn's Economics for Dummies. But then again, it's the only pop economics book I've read. Maybe check Amazon reviews on it and related books have bought along with it.
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
So not only have you never read an economics book, but it seems you never learned how to read in general. You being unable to read properly explains why you never read an economics book.
Since you have trouble reading beyond a 3rd grade level I'll try to explain this as simply as I can.
China no communist or capitalist. China have elements of both. Capitalist elements good for China economy. Make it second largest economy. Communist elements bad for China economy. Prevent it from being largest economy.
Do you understand now little guy?
>By your logic, capitalism has never worked either
See, there's your inability to read at play again. Or maybe you just don't understand logic in general. Makes sense, after all, all communists are illogical. But if we play by actual logic, you'd see that there are hundreds of examples of capitalism working. Can't find a single example of communism working though :(
It was fun but you're starting to bore me so I'll leave you with this:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
Read that, and when you finally acquire even a basic grasp of economics, hopefully you'll be able to produce something that remotely resembles an intelligent thought.
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
You might benefit from this.
Yes
>The US has a minority rule in the sense that the constitution protect the minority from the decision of the majority. Context? Give some examples.
Where in the Constitution supports your argument? Cause if you did know you would have posted that section of the Constitution rather than link to Amazon.
What is your argument again and what section is it? https://constitutionus.com/
>We have an example of limited government. It’s ours. You and people like you have and are changing that by confiscating lawful property to give to others whom you deem more worthy of it.
Your answering an argument I didn't make. Changing zoning laws isn't taking away any ones property. Having affordable housing that allows all San Franciscans to raised and die isn't some fantasy, like ending slavery, protection of indigenous Americans, women's right to vote, civil rights, disabled rights, and rights of gays. The right to affordable housing is civil right considering the importance of ones home.
>Throwing out feel good platitudes doesn’t change 1. The constitution. 2. Basic laws of economics and 3. Human nature.
Thomas Sowell the Libertarian, would rather read "Economics for Dummies,
lemme help u out babby girl
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0470879483
Don't worry, the up votes have spoken for who's post is ludicrous, and it is yours.
Here are some reading resources for you:
http://www.amazon.com/Stochastic-Methods-Economics-Advanced-Textbooks/dp/0444862013/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309949494&sr=1-6
http://www.amazon.com/Econometrics-Financial-Markets-John-Campbell/dp/0691043019/ref=pd_sim_b_2
and, to ensure you can understand one of these:
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Business-Personal-Finance/dp/0470879483/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1309949559&sr=1-1
If your unwilling to learn for yourself the causes of a problem how can you talk about a solution?
I suggest you start here:
https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Dummies-Sean-Masaki-Flynn/dp/0470879483
> No. I have much more experience with universities than you do. I can guarantee that.
Emptying trash cans doesn't count.
> This is just illiterate in every way.
No, you just have a hard time understanding big words. Currency is part of an economy, not the whole of it. I realize that sounds complicated, it isn't. Perhaps you should try a book at you're reading level.
> You have absolutely no idea what "modern economists support" or don't support. Nor would you even understand how to judge or contextualize such.
Really, because there's about 5 universities in the entire world that have actual coursework regarding the Austrian School. And you're knowledge of the school is clearly broad, given that you named exactly 1 economist from the school that actually influenced mainstream economics (Menger and Wieser actually influenced modern economics, Mises didn't).
Given that the Austrian School is literally considered non-mainstream economics, I'm pretty sure I can say that modern economists don't support the school of thought or it would fucking be mainstream, moron.
> So fucking transparently stupid. Go back to your league of legends subreddit you fucking manchild.
LOL. Nothing like a combination of drivel followed up by creepy shit looking at my post history.
> "Widely held" among your dumbshit "friends" on the internet. Not by academics or anyone else with real educations.
Yes, my friends include Wikipedia, modern economists like Krugman and Skidelsky, Friedman.
When the Chicago School, Keynesian Economists AND fucking Marxists all agree that something is wrong, you can safely assume it's wrong. And had you read anyone besides Austrian School authors, you'd know the over-fucking-whelming majority of economists suggest that many of it's principles are downright harmful.
But keep insulting me without a shred of information because that would require you actually having any fucking idea what you're talking about. But like the Austrians before you, you're on the wrong side of this one. And much like Mises, you'll refuse to believe you could actually be wrong. The difference is, Mises was actually smart. You're a complete moron who can't even defend the very subject you are discussing because you have zero fucking idea what any of it means.
Faça bom uso