Kinda wild that the model just gave up when it hit current debt levels. Not because the math was off but because it assumes we’ll “fix things later” by default. That’s not a forecast, it’s blind hope baked into the system.
Feels like we’ve passed the point where debt is just a background worry. If the models can’t even handle where we’re at now, maybe the risks are way closer than we’d like to think.
rvba · 17m ago
If the model cannot handle when we are now, then it is a vad model.
Same for a model crashing.
Different thing is if it showed that repayment is inpossible.
The article mentions a ery important subject, but quality is low.
It is interesting that the complaint is that the model would not converge. Convergence might be a nice property to have or desire, but simple systems don't necessarily converge. For instance ecosystems are chaotic.
N_Lens · 11m ago
Economics seems more like a religion than science, with how much fundamental belief and perceptions seem to influence outcomes.
HPsquared · 6m ago
There are certainly a lot of apologetics.
HPsquared · 23m ago
Whenever I read about macroeconomics I remember the Phillips machine, the MONIAC (MOnetary National Income Analogue Computer):
Feels like we’ve passed the point where debt is just a background worry. If the models can’t even handle where we’re at now, maybe the risks are way closer than we’d like to think.
Same for a model crashing.
Different thing is if it showed that repayment is inpossible.
The article mentions a ery important subject, but quality is low.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reification_(fallacy)
It is interesting that the complaint is that the model would not converge. Convergence might be a nice property to have or desire, but simple systems don't necessarily converge. For instance ecosystems are chaotic.
https://youtu.be/beuseJ0Wm3M