I want to study economics. How should I get started? What are

Where do you live/ want to study?

How to get started? I guess there is a lot of online learning resources... a basic macro and micro course would be a good start. Ensure you have a sufficient background in math and statistics is desirable.

Currently, graduating undergrad and looking to go into masters.

>>7780282
Community college would probably be the best place for an intro.
>>7780320
Nice, how are the job prospects? I am considering changing my major.

File: bad_economics.gif (11KB, 485x478px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 485x478px

>>7780282
Understand the economics is very depressing. It really is a "dismal science". You learn how massive collective stupidity can be, in a manner that effectively destroys your hope for humanity.

So I ask why do you want to study this?

note: I hold a secondary Bachelors of Since in Economics.

>>7780320
I live in the US, but could live in Europe. What are the best online places to learn?

>>7781224
It seems like the most interesting social science. Honestly, I'd like to be in a think tank that influences societal change through say pigovian taxes or something. But that probably takes a PhD/connections/lord knows what.

So I know of like the austrian and chicago schools, but what are the hot contemporary places? What are the rising areas of study?

>>7781281
It really pisses me off how Amerifucks say Europe like it's one country. Saying 'I'm visiting Europe' is as vague as saying 'I'm visiting the Southern Hemisphere'

>>7781315
The EU is only slightly larger than the continental US, I know its still vague because cultural boundaries etc but thats just because we're densely populated nations while the US and Canada are not. Geographically "Europe" is less vague than "North America" or "Russia" and the common market means if he can move to one nation in the EU he can move to any.

>>7780282
http://4chan-science.wikia.com/wiki/Economics_Textbook_Recommendations

Got a bechelor in economics, and going for the master next year.
As someone pointed out, start with micro/macro. It's the easier learned broader subjects based on it's relevancy. If you're not that familier with more advanced math (no need to be a genius, but I've seen enough people fail because of this), you should read up on that before semester start.

Other than that, find a school you know you're gonna like. If you want to study in Europe, choose from the top 50 in the financial times rankings.

>>7781323
EU =/= Europe

>>7781281
Don't know about fields or job market much.

I took the degree as I had unknowingly completed all but two requirements through my other studies and thought why not just get a second degree if I am that close. Also the department head was very aggressive at getting me after I took his into course.

But you are right in that think tanks take PhD with real connections.

I studied at a top ranked engineering school, so people didn't respect our economic department much. There was a lot of talk about resource and environmental economics as the future, but not sure how speculative that was.

What struck me was the differences in the different schools of thought. Helps to look at it historically as they flow together, also helps in getting context as things like WWII and the telegraph really changed how things worked.

I eventually came to the idea that any model used effects the system, thus the recursion invalidates the valid model. So all models I use are built to be recurse. People say it is circular reasoning and mock them, but really anything less will break after so many cycles unless the rules change.
(infinite growth + finite planet = problem)

Also depending on the college econ can be very math intensive. I actually think I used more of my differential equations in econ than in engineering.

>>7781315
Sorry, I meant I'd be willing to move to most places in the Western Asian Peninsula. I suppose Latin America, Singapore or Hong Kong too. Anywhere with the best economics schools in English or Spanish.

>>7781327
neat, thanks! Know if/where to torrent those?

>>7781342
Are the financial times rankings mostly for finance or business? Those are the ones I found.

>>7781485
So what were current schools of thought? What was the popular one at your school? Did you hear anything, even the jokes/stereotypes, about the other schools?

I haven't done any stats. But I'm fine with math, like calculus and linear algebra. I'd prefer a highly quantitative, science focused program.

>>7781573
Most business schools offer Degrees in economy. Understanding economy, one must also understand business and finance - therefore it's natural that good faculties are placed within the same walls.
But then again, not all offer pure economics.

>>7781794
From what I've seen that is one of the problems. I'm not trying to get a business degree but learn a science. Certainly I wouldn't mind a couple business and finance classes, but being able to sit for a CPA seems like a waste of time.

>>7780282
>lolberterian
Is this still a thing in 4chins? Especially in /sci/?

File: 123.png (22KB, 591x519px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 591x519px

>>7782541
No, 4chan is New Keynesian now. Muh DSGE muthafucka.

>>7781281
>kek just so you know the austrian/chicago/keynes whatever bullshit is not what you will be learning.

Pick up Hal Varian's Micro Textbook to start. I can mail you mine if you want. And then move onto a macro text. And you need a decent stats and calc knowledge. after that i have no clue.

>>7782514
Hmm, ok, i'll try to understand you on this.
Do you want to end up somewhere in academia, public, or private sector? Whats your end goal in degrees, MsC, EBA, PhD?
Are you more of an soft-science guy (governmental and society studies), or analytic?

>>7781281
I've got a bachelors in economics and I'm working on a PhD in math right now. Lately, a lot of the more interesting discussions I've heard have been about functional finance and, more specifically, Neo-Chartalism (or MMT as it's colloquially called). I'd recommend the MMT Primer if you want a reasonable intro.

File: _8134717_orig.jpg (208KB, 620x465px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 620x465px

>>7782560
Ok, so DSGE is hot, what is the competitor? Agent-based modeling? Ok, DSGE is a model versus ABM is simulation? Are they both computationally intensive? It seems like ABM would be more easily massively parallelizable?

>>7782629
That is very generous, anon. I found a pdf of the 8th edition, which I think will work. pic unrelated. (can't upload pdfs here?)

>>7782712
In my dreams, I'd be in whichever, public/private, that might actually improve society. In reality, I'm rather cynical about my chances at influencing anything. Sorry, I don't know what soft-science vs. analytic might mean. If it helps, I was studying physics, but now it seems kind of irrelevant and frivolous. (I've done well on the math part, and it doesn't sound like econ math would be harder?)

>>7782734
Thanks, I've heard nothing about it before, I will look at it. Where is the place it is being most heavily developed? (So far I have to say, a theory that tells politicians to create more government debt seems suspiciously convenient...)

>>7781573
To be honest people were still talking about Keynesian's school, everyone seems to still be talking about that one. Although many were adding small modifiers as they all seemed to admit it had some problems, but none wanted actually call it "broken". Even I don't really think it is broken as the reasoning is sound, but prefer the term "non-applicable" as some core assumptions seem not to be met anymore. But if one needs to fix a model with a bunch of modifiers, then one should start to also asking if it is broken given all the fixing that is being done. Also many don't follow all of his model as Keynes actually did talk about savings more then people realize.

Oddly enough

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nERTFo-Sk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTQnarzmTOc

summarizes a lot of the arguments I heard, in a very entertaining way.

The older economist, even the European ones, are largely ignored as their models obviously don't apply anymore or are reused in newer models that give them no credit. I mean the older people like Marie-Esprit-Léon Walras were huge, but I found out about him almost by accident

However the big thing I took was that most of their models did work for back then because things were different. That is why I stress historical and future context when I talk about this stuff. And why I say the Luddites being historically wrong does not mean technical unemployment is a myth now. Times change and models need to reflect that

Or as I figure we make the model self reference and self fulfilling so it always works, provided no major external force breaks it. One of my hypothetical setups was so stable it require a global famine of 3 or more years to break it, but as many were quick to point out the starting conditions would likely never happen in today's world. Sad part was many thought pondering such extreme hypothetical setups was a waste of time. Literalists trying to describe abstract concepts, and they wonder why we have such disconnect

>>7780282
>economics
>/sci/

Pick one

>>7782560
Fun thing is that Keynes saw no reason for the tax pressure to be over 25%-ish.

Fucking tired that Keynes is used as an invective.

>>7782774
I don't think the math part would be a problem for you in that case. When in comes to the soft-science vs. analytic, I think I might have explained myself rather badly. What I ment was, What aspect of economics are you the most interested in? headlines, theories, debates, etch?

When it comes to improving society, do you have something special in mind? Some schools have dedicated researcher which also teach at undergrad/grad level.

Before you read the big authors, I'd work through a basic course in both micro and macro.

Also, if you're bad at math, I'd go over some elementary stats and algebra. If you want to study academically, you'll need calculus and linear algebra and stuff, but for basic functional knowledge, you just have to be comfortable with numbers and basic algebra.

Then, you can go into the well known authors. People like a Smith, Ricardo, Keynes, Friedman, even Marx, etc...

Another thing to do is read current events with a mind towards econ. Thinking about things like the Greek monetary crisis, the price of oil dropping, or the consequences of immigration in Germany on it's pension/retirement funds will get you in the econ mindset.

Source: Majoring in finance and math, might do a phd in financial econ.

>>7783904
I'm mostly coming at economics from game theory and puzzles like envy-free cake-cutting. I don't know, maybe doing chemical physics in some nanotech lab would actually produce greater utility. But it seems like helping the G8/big-banks/zurich-gnomes move the world would be super interesting.

>>7784831
Both of the mentioned are covered simply by the first year - both at pure economic and business programmes. Seems like you're more interested in the macro aspect. Thinking maybe Warwick, LSE, Stockholm school of economics, CBS, etch. Been looking at any of those?

PhD in Economics (Macro/Political Econ) here.
It's a fascinating field of study, but the more you learn about it, the more you realise that the world is run by people who know fuck all about Economic thinking.

World of Academia is bullshit and not worth going into. You can do great work, and nobody will ever give a fuck, because publishing (and getting citations) is a trainwreck.

If you're proficient in mathematics (or at least don't struggle with logical reasoning), you can study most undergrad Economics materials on your own without too many issues. That'll give you some basic insights, at least. Graduate and post-graduate materials are a lot more challenging, but also more relevant to real life. Don't become a model-monkey; Theory is useful (and necessary), but worthless without empirical research.

There's a fad for behavioural economics right now, but honestly, it's just a giant game theory circlejerk.

File: 20090325-ek36xkmmrrf3d3dhjugtwfdaghrender.png (28KB, 747x495px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 747x495px

>>7780282

Go back to bed Hayek.

>>7785792
>normalizing the indice at 1929
>assuming all countries were at the same level of industrialization at that point.

File: 31dAaWOs9cL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (10KB, 228x346px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 228x346px

The best place to start

>>7785410
It is just the areas I know at all plus reading things like "Naked Economics: Undressing the Dismal Science"

>>7785530
If you aren't going into academia, what is the PhD for? (Apparently there is a field called econophysics, not that I know anything about it.)