연합뉴스 [속보] 문대통령 "한미정상회담 결과 두고 중국과 소통중" ---> 반역죄로 당장 체포되어야 하지 않을까? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 충격적인 일들이 벌어지고 있다. 주민자치 실체.(210526) https://youtu.be/FBjAhzkDRwA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 법TV LIVE] 국적법 일부개정법률안 관련 온라인 공청회 법무부TV 본 공청회는 입법예고(2021. 4. 26. ~ 6. 7.)중인 국적법 일부개정법률안과 관련하여 국민의 의견을 경청하기 위해 2021. 5. 26.(수) 14시부터 16시30분까지 온라인으로 개최됩니다. ○ 누구나 시청할 수 있으며, 공청회 전 또는 공청회 토론 진행 중 이메일을 이용하여 질의사항을 제출하실 수 있습니다. 제출된 질의 중 일부를 선정하여 공청회 토론 후 답변하는 시간을 가질 예정입니다. ○ 공청회 서면질의 제출방법 - 방법 : '제목 / 성명(소속) / 이메일 / 의견내용'을 작성하신 후 bj85seok@korea.kr 로 전달(자유양식) - 기간 : 공청회 패널토론 종료시까지 ※ 국적법 개정안에 대해 추가적인 의견이 있는 경우 국민참여입법센터(https://opinion.lawmaking.go.kr) 홈페이지에 입법의견을 제출할 수도 있습니다. https://youtu.be/pditP9nyH-Q --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 윤석열의 처 김건희, 그녀는 누구일까?(수정본) https://youtu.be/p_IhsxpMCoU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 왜 경제학 모델은 인간 현실을 현실적으로 반영하지 못하나 자연과학에서는 실험실의 실험을 통해 다양한 요소를 격리하고 그들의 운동을 추적하는 게 가능하지만, 경제학에서는 그런 실험실이 없다. 수리경제학과 모델 만들기는 자연과학의 실험실과 같은 것을 만들려는 노력이었다. 일단 그러한 모델이 완성되면, 정치가들은 다양한 정책의 결과를 평가할 수가 있기 때문에, 그러한 경제적 실험실은 정치가나 경제학자들이 갖고 싶어 하는 것이다. 수학을 응용함으로써 주류 경제학은 자연과학을 흉내내려 하고 있다. 자연과학에서는 수학을 이용해 사물의 기본 성질을 공식화 할 수 있다. 하지만 경제학에서는 이런 방법이 타당하지 않은 데, 그 이유는 경제학이 다루는 대상은 사물이 아니라 인간이기 때문이다. 경제학이 다루는 경험은 복잡 현상의 경험이다. 인간의 행동과 관련해서는 어떤 실험도 가능하지가 않다. 인간의 정신은 자동 공정이 아니고, 개인마다 자신의 상황에 맞게 행동하기 때문에, 수학적 공식으로 이런 인간의 본성을 잡아낼 수가 없다. 인간의 정신, 그의 가치, 관념 등을 측정하는 항구적인 기준이 없으므로, 수학적인 측정이 불가능하다. 수학적 함수의 사용은 인간의 행동이 다양한 요소에 의해 작동된다는 전제를 깔고 있다. 사람들이 그들의 소득 변화에 반응하는 건 사실이지만, 수학적 공식처럼 그것이 자동적이지는 않다는 것이다. 예를 들어, 한 사람의 소득이 증가했다고 해서, 그의 소비도 반드시 늘지는 않는다는 것이다. 그가 차나 집을 사기 위해 오히려 더 많은 돈을 저축할 수도 있는 것이다. 수리경제학의 모델에서 인간들은 변화에 자동적으로 반응하는 로봇과 같은 존재로 격하된다. 수리경제학은 케인즈 경제학의 모델과 궤를 같이 하는데, 케인즈 경제학에서는 인간이 아니라 국내총생산을 기본 개념으로 하고 있다. 하지만 인간 세계의 모든 것은 인간의 의도적인 행동에 의해 나타난 것들이다. Why Economic Models Can't Provide a Realistic Picture of Human Behavior Frank Shostak While in the natural sciences a laboratory experiment can isolate various elements and their movements can be followed through, there is no equivalent in the economic discipline. The introduction of econometrics and model building is an attempt to produce a laboratory where controlled experiments can be conducted. The idea of having such a laboratory is very appealing to economists and politicians, since once the model is built and endorsed as a good replica of the economy, politicians can evaluate the outcomes of various policies. This, it is argued, will enhance the efficiency of government policies and thus lead to a better and more prosperous economy. It is also suggested that the model can serve as a referee in validating various economic ideas. Apart from assessing the impact of various policies, the other purpose of a model is to provide an indication regarding the future. By means of mathematical and statistical methods, a model builder establishes relationships between various economic variables. For example, personal consumer outlays are related to personal disposable income and interest rates, while fixed capital spending is explained by the past stock of capital, interest rates, and economic activity. A collection of such various estimated relations—i.e., equations—constitutes an econometric model. A comparison of the goodness of the fit between the dynamic simulation and the actual data is an important in assessing the reliability of a model. (In a static simulation, the model is solved using known lagged variables. In a dynamic simulation, the model is solved by employing its own generated lagged variables). The final test of the model is its response to a policy variable change, such as an increase in taxes or a rise in government outlays. By means of a qualitative assessment, a model builder decides whether the response is reasonable or not. Once the model is successfully constructed, it is ready to be used. Are Mathematical Models Valid in Economics? By applying mathematics, mainstream economics is attempting to follow in the footsteps of the natural sciences. In the natural sciences, the employment of mathematics enables scientists to formulate the essential nature of objects. By means of a mathematical formula, the response of objects to a particular stimulus in a given condition is captured. Consequently, within these given conditions, the same response will be obtained time and again. The same approach, however, is not valid in economics, for economics is supposed to deal with human beings and not objects. According to Mises in Human Action, The experience with which the sciences of human action have to deal is always an experience of complex phenomena. No laboratory experiments can be performed with regard to human action. The main characteristic or nature of human beings is that they are rational animals. They use their minds to sustain their lives and well-being. The usage of the mind, however, is not an automatic procedure, but rather every individual employs his mind in accordance with his own circumstances. This makes it impossible to capture human nature by means of mathematical formulae, as is done in the natural sciences. To pursue quantitative analysis implies the possibility of the assignment of numbers, which can be subjected to all of the operations of arithmetic. To accomplish this, it is necessary to define an objective fixed unit. Such an objective unit, however, does not exist in the realm of human valuations. On this Mises wrote in Human Action, "There are, in the field of economics, no constant relations, and consequently no measurement is possible." There are no constant standards for measuring the minds, the values, and the ideas of men. People have the freedom of choice to change their minds and pursue actions that are contrary to what was observed in the past. Because of the unique nature of human beings, analyses in economics can only be qualitative. Individual goals or ends set the standard for valuing the facts of reality. For instance, if the goal of an individual is to improve his health, then he will establish which goods will benefit his health and which will not. Among those that will benefit him, some will be more effective than others. There is no way, however, to quantify this effectiveness. All that one could do is rank these goods in accordance with perceived effectiveness. The use of mathematics in economics poses another serious problem. The employment of mathematical functions implies that human actions are set in motion by various factors. For instance, contrary to the mathematical way of thinking, individual outlays on goods are not "caused" by real income as such. In his own context, every individual decides how much of a given amount of income will be used for consumption and how much for savings. While it is true that people respond to changes in their incomes, the response is not automatic, as depicted by a mathematical formula. An increase in an individual’s income does not automatically imply that his consumption expenditure will follow suit. Every individual assesses the increase in income against the goals he wants to achieve. Thus, he might decide that it is more beneficial for him to raise his savings rather than raise his consumption. From this perspective an econometric model, which is a collection of various equations, is a misleading description of the real world of human beings. In the world of econometric models, individuals are reduced to robots that respond mechanically to a change in various driving variables. Why Probability Distribution Is Not Relevant in Economics The econometric model building in addition to mathematics also employs probability. What is probability? The probability of an event is the proportion of times the event happens out of a large number of trials. For instance, the probability of obtaining heads when a coin is tossed is 0.5. This does not mean that when a coin is tossed ten times, five heads are always obtained. However, if the experiment is repeated a large number of times then it is likely that heads will be obtained 50 percent of the time. The greater the number of throws, the nearer the approximation is likely to be. In economics, we do not deal with homogeneous cases. Each observation is unique. Consequently, no probability distribution can be established. (Again, probability distribution rests on the assumption that we are dealing with homogeneous cases.) Let us take, for instance, entrepreneurial activities. If these activities were homogeneous, with known probability distributions, then we would not need entrepreneurs. An entrepreneur is an individual who arranges his activities toward finding out consumers’ future requirements. People’s requirements however, are never constant with respect to a particular good. Since entrepreneurial activities are not homogeneous, this means that probability distribution for entrepreneurial returns cannot be formed. The assumption that mainstream economics makes, that probability distribution is valid in economics, leads to absurd results, for it describes not a world of human beings who exercise their minds in making choices, but machines. The employment of probabilities implies that a random process generated the various pieces of economic data, similarly to tossing a coin. Note that random means arbitrary, i.e., without method or conscious decision. However, if this were the case, human beings would not be able to survive for too long. In order to maintain their lives and well-being, human beings must act consciously and purposefully. They must plan their actions and employ suitable means. Other Issues in Using Econometric Models Given that, human beings are governed by freedom of choice, various policy analyses by means of models, known as "what if" or multiplier analyses, are likely to generate questionable results. In conducting the “what if” experiment, as a rule, a model builder utilizes a given model whose equations' parameters remain intact. This is however, questionable. For instance, say the model builder wants to evaluate the effect of a change in government outlays on various markets. It is quite likely that a change in government outlays will affect the parameters of various equations. If the model builder were to ignore this and leave the structure of equations intact, this would mean that individuals in the economy ceased to be alive and were, in fact, frozen. On this Mises writes in The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science: As a method of economic analysis econometrics is a childish play with figures that does not contribute anything to the elucidation of the problems of economic reality. Another major problem with most large-scale econometric models is that they are designed along the lines of Keynesian thinking. The main variable in these models is gross domestic product (GDP), which is explained within the model framework by the interactions between various lumped data, known as aggregates. The interaction between various aggregates in the model framework gives the impression that the economy is about gross domestic product, not about human beings and human life. Obviously, this runs contrary to the fact that everything in the human world is caused by man’s purposeful conduct. To improve an econometric model’s capability as a forecasting tool, the predictive capability of each equation in the model is tested against the actual data. The difference between the actual data and the data obtained from the equations, i.e., the error term (also known as the add factor), is extrapolated forward and incorporated into the model’s equations. In many instances the forecast produced by an econometric model is heavily influenced by the add factor, which allows the model builder to force the outcome of the forecast in line with his “gut feelings.” All this casts doubts on the scientific procedures employed by econometric modeling. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------