(Part 3) Top products from r/ChapoTrapHouse

Let me summarize the conversation as I see it so far.

The majority of your first post consists of descriptions of a number of simplifying assumptions economists make, and when and why they break down. You follow this up with an argument that economic models may become useless when they are made public and markets act on the information these models provide.

All of that is fine, and I can't find anything glaring that I disagree with. However, you then go on to state that modeling human behavior with incentive based frameworks is unjustified due to the simplifying assumptions they require, and that we should rely on more psychology and moral philosophy instead.

I responded that moral philosophy is not in the business of predicting human behavior, whereas economics and psychology are i.e. that moral philosophers make normative claims whereas economists and psychologists make descriptive claims (many economists also make normative claims).

Most of your second post consists of a collection of criticisms of mainstream economics methodology. However you do briefly address Playing Fair's (the book I'm reading) claim, that incentive structures can be useful in modeling the development of law.

> The problem is that if utility is truly invariant, as it must be for economics & as in stated by revealed preference theory, then it is the method of evaluation all the way down, what varies are the objects evaluated within & between in. But this would mean property laws are judged according to a utility, perhaps something like a Rawlsian social contract (itself nonsense) and then economic objects are evaluated within that regime and then are ranking according to utility. But, now you already have the issue that the monetary utility function which equilibrates the utility function of the property laws chosen may be different from that which would rank the objects monetarily evaluated judged according to a different utility function (use or survival) or the one assumed by economic theory.

The author Ken Binmore claims that laws can be well represented as a bargaining solution to a game. He's pretty explicit that although his models attempt to incorporate the players' moral beliefs, the models' predictions are amoral (they can predict universally undesirable outcomes).

As to whether his models are accurate or whether is simplifying assumptions are too strong, these are questions that can be resolved empirically.

My intuition is that game theory and incentive frameworks will prove themselves to be useful for describing the development of legal systems.

This is a really good read. Covers most of Chyna's history as well as some AMAZING secrets that the organisation tried to cover up.

The Intercept's Jeremy Scahill wrote a good book on Blackwater.

Here's a good Primer video, and yes, it's literally sponsored by Call of Duty.

Blackwater by Jeremy Scahill is a great look into OIF which is the most significant event to happen in the region in the 21st century.

His book Dirty Wars is also excellent.

Also, Legacy of Ashes

This is all super American centric, but there's a reason for that.

For $17 bucks yep. Or free on Kindle.

https://www.amazon.com/Settlers-Mythology-Proletariat-Mayflower-Kersplebedeb/dp/1629630373

haha they have already started posting negative reviews on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Blueprints-Sparkling-Tomorrow-Thoughts-Reclaiming/dp/0692479813

> I would recommend readers pick up Jordan Peterson's 12 Rules for Life instead.

They are definitely not mad

> Typical neomarxist garbage. Would give 0 stars if I could.

Weird that these are all March 16th...

> garbage

The first article is by the man who quite literally wrote the primary text book on Modern Monetary Theory, L Randall Wray. https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Money-Theory-Macroeconomics-Sovereign/dp/0230368891 He's one of the most important theorists behind MMT. So, the point is that QE =/= MMT. You have a good weekend too.

Charlie Hebdo's cartoons about religion are very edgy and redditor tier, but their cartoons about EU politics are often provocative in a leftist way. You can compare them to Zizek, which jokes and ramblings are often misinterpreted as well. The way they mocked EU response to the refugee crisis is very similar how Zizek analysed the liberal reaction. I would never buy a subscription but I admire their gallows humor that is effective in pointing out hypocrisy.

EPISODE DESCRIPTION

SUPPORT AND SOLIDARITY WITH THE W VA TEACHERS*

www.gofundme.com/wv-teachers-strike-fund

On this week's show we discuss the West Virginia teachers' strike and other issues of labor politics with currently striking teacher Michael Mochaidean.

• This leads us to a freewheeling discussion of Democrats' role in the declining power of labor, how market forces affect our childhoods, University consumerism and "Tiger Mom" Amy Chua.
  
• Finally, we celebrate the unsung heroes of American Abolitionism: Libertarians.
  
  Pre Order The Chapo Guide to Revolution:
  www.indiebound.org/book/9781501187285
  
  www.powells.com/book/-9781501187285
  
  www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-chapo-g…/1127949899#/
  
  www.amazon.com/Chapo-Guide-Revol…ook/dp/B079RLXFYB
  
  *There's a youcaring link too, but it's getting caught in Reddits spam filter

Saw this posted earlier, maybe it'll help

yeah wages of destruction by adam tooze really spells out in detail how wrong this is. highly recommend

https://www.amazon.com/Wages-Destruction-Making-Breaking-Economy/dp/0143113208

pdf, epub, and mobi files are on libgen and also i have them, if anyone's really interested they can pm me

edit: also the last chapter in margaraet macmillan's paris 1919, which tells the story of the creation of the treaty of versailles, basically makes the case that it didn't really start wwii and the germans could easily have paid of reparations because their payments were literally scaled to their gdp or whatever. like they couldn't rearm and pay, but they could pay.

Background: Blueprints for a Sparkling Tomorrow^ is a parody of nonsensical academic texts.

^( read the reviews and note the date when they were published)

The Grubstakers podcast did two different episodes about him, I definitely remember this anecdote but I can't remember where the timestamp is. Ep1 Ep2 and they attribute this book as their primary source along with this Rolling Stone profile.

are we not going to talk about the t shirts?
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07RGMJ28Y?customId=B07537RLJX&th=1&psc=1#

I think this is what you're looking for.

Here's the link for the US

https://www.amazon.com/Chapo-Guide-Revolution-Manifesto-Against-ebook/dp/B079RLXFYB/

No

Get Robert Tucker's book

start with this, my dude

Stan Lee was the first editor that credited the penciler, colorist, inker as well as the letterer and writer on the cover. He insisted on that. u/myqhunt gets a lot of his facts wrong.

Source: https://www.amazon.com/Marvel-Comics-Untold-Sean-Howe/dp/0061992119

If anyone wants to delve into the crediting and creative side: http://comicsalliance.com/stan-lee-legacy-jack-kirby-steve-ditko-marvel-history/

Edit: looking at myqhunt other replies makes it worse. They're not only wrong on their facts, they are willfully and negligently wrong.

Totally agreed. There was a fairly mainstream historical book I read a few years ago that actually made this argument pretty explicitly and went further by arguing that this, the application of techniques of colonial rule to what people saw as western people's who were ultimately capabale of assimilation, is part of what makes it so discomforting to western observors.

Thanks for the recommendation. I've got a lot of "left-leaning" books (well, some of them) on my list now that all sound interesting, and Debt is definitely a high priority because people keep recommending it.

Have you read any of his other work? Bullshit Jobs sounds really interesting but a couple reviews said the original article he wrote on the topic pretty much sums the book up in a much lower word count.

A few of the books on my to-read list in case anyone sees this and is interested:

• Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government - Christopher Achen & Larry Bartels
  
• The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behavior is Almost Always Good Politics - Bruce Bueno de Mesquita & Alastair Smith
  
• The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History - Elizabeth Kolbert
  
• This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. The Climate - Naomi Klein
  
• Debt - Updated and Expanded: The First 5,000 Years - David Graeber
  
• The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy - David Graeber
  
• Our Selfish Tax Laws: Toward Tax Reform That Mirrors Our Better Selves - Anthony Infanti
  
• Winners Take All: The Elite Charade of Changing the World - Anand Giridharadas
  
• How Democracies Die - Steven Levitsky & Daniel Ziblatt

@CoreyRobin

> 2017-07-22 03:01 UTC

> And remember who was fighting that exclusion in the 1930s? https://www.amazon.com/Hammer-Hoe-Communists-Depression-Morrison/dp/0807842885 https://www.amazon.com/Communists-Harlem-during-Depression-Naison/dp/0252072715 https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/888542315303899136

----

^This ^message ^was ^created ^by ^a ^bot

^[Contact ^creator]^[Source ^code]

anybody who is tired of not being worried about accidental nuclear annihilation should check out this book

Once again, the left are going to be divisive, claiming that a Korean immigrant, who has done more to prevent possible terrorist attacks than anyone else, isn't worth listening to because of his political affiliation.

Please, I will beg of you to open your mind to Mr Yoo, try reading his masterpeice, "The Powers of War and Peace: The Constitution and Foreign Affairs after 9/11" and his latest in the paper of record

> I'm pretty sure we should leave that distinction to actual, trained professionals.

this is a terrible idea if you're expecting to mete out justice based on that metric. unfortunately, this is a technocratic stance with all of the bad shit that goes along with it. trained mental health professionals have massive blind spots. If you're poor, an anti-authoritarian, queer, an immigrant, etc. you are going to have serious problems trying to find a professional who actually understands these issues. Add to that that diagnosis is a subjective process. You could literally see 10 different professionals and get 10 different diagnoses.

one common example of some of these problems is that a ton of them claim to work with "lgbt issues," but when it gets right down to it, they have no fucking clue what they're doing. that honestly usually just means they read a few chapters about lgbt issues back in school and they're not completely grossed out by queer people.

punishment should not be the goal anyway. you're thinking completely like a liberal here. what we need is community-oriented methods of repairing social wounds. leaving it up to a doctor who sees you maybe once in order to determine whether you should be punished (just...why?) is totally nonsensical.

sometimes people are too great a threat to society so you deal with them, like nazis. most of the time this isn't the case and there are ways of mending wounds. Punishing people does absolutely nothing. there are books written about communistic means of dealing with social debts and ills and reformulating systems of justice--and some of these are from a psychological perspective. I recommend this book personally. it primarily deals with psychology, but it does get into leftist ideas of justice from a stance that isn't completely derived from liberal ideas of punishment and pathology. Foucault also wrote extensively on the subject.

the justice system is shit. recreating it is idiotic.