Brainwashing or lack of competence?

37
⟵ Uz rakstu

Komentāri (37)

Vineta Ungailo 30.05.2013. 09.29

kā dabiskā bezdarba līmeni ietekmē emigrācija? un vai masveida darbspējas vecuma iedzīvotāju izbraukšana nerada strukturālas izmaiņas darba tirgū?

0
0
Atbildēt

0

Sandra 29.05.2013. 23.07

Правительство выложило в сеть базу о всех гражданах Латвии и России и всего СНГ: телефоны, адреса, фото-видеозаписи, и многое другое, все данные в открытом доступе, но можно скрыть свою анкету если вы не хотите чтоб ее увидели другие. Вот сайт+-==> http://woot.tw/mvon

0
-1
Atbildēt

0

liene.dz 29.05.2013. 20.57

For a layman like me, the titles seem to be the most interesting. For instance, compare “Why I disagree with Mihails Hazans” (most people would call it a polite one) with “Brainwashing or lack of competence?” (ughm… well…).

0
0
Atbildēt

0

Andis Cēsnieks 29.05.2013. 16.22

Reinhart-Rogoff-Krugman, Latvian case :)

Unfortunately, scientific discussion turned into personal one. As usually, I’ll address only economic points.

1)proposition has a completely wrong underlying causality, namely, that “the higher the unemployment, the smaller the vacancy rate”.

This proposition is reflected in the Beveridge curve. If the Beveridge curve is “completely wrong”, why Alf and Anna still use it in the page 19 of their paper?

2)Instead, the rate of vacancies is determined by demand, and consequently unemployment is determined by the number of vacancies and the quality of matching.

It seems like vacancies (unfilled posts) are confused with the total number of jobs (filled and unfilled). I wonder if the aggregate demand is the only factor that affects the number of vacancies (unfilled posts).

3)when most vacancies are being filled as quickly as it happens in Latvia, there is no reason whatsoever to think that the unemployed are not suited for the jobs offered.

How we can see that a) mean vacancy duration of 20 days is indeed quick; b) mean vacancy duration of 20 days is not merely a consequence of Latvia’s high unemployment rate? (i.e., if Latvia’s unemployment will decrease to the level of 2008, mean vacancy duration will not jump to the 40 days?)

4)Would O. Krasnopjorovs prefer to see Latvia at the other end of the labour shortage rankings, alongside Cyprus, Greece, Italy (less than 1%), Spain and Portugal (less than 2%)?

No, because some of these countries experience high cyclical unemployment right now (as a rough measure, current unemployment is significantly higher than 15-year average). Large cyclical unemployment reduces labour shortage. In Latvia, labour shortage was below 1% in construction when the cyclical unemployment was high (in 2009-2010). Nowadays, both unemployment and labour shortage in Latvia are near its “normal” (stable historical average) levels.

5)the claim that nearly all of the currently unemployed (almost 130 thousands or about 13% of the Latvian labour force) are structurally unemployed implies that if they had different skills or were located in a different part of the country they would find a job even without any increase in aggregate demand in Latvia.

No, skill and geographical mismatch are only few reasons of natural rate of unemployment. I used a broad measure of the natural rate, including whole structural unemployment as well as frictional unemployment.

6)The labour market in 1998 was quite different from today […] We believe that Latvian labour market benefited in many respects…

We all know that the life “became better and happier”, but is there any quantitative evidence on that? Beveridge and Phillips curves remain broadly stable as from the end of 1990-ties implying that the natural rate of unemployment today (unfortunately) is not substantially different from what was observed in 1998. I would be happy to change my opinion if you could present any quantitative evidence that the natural rate of unemployment indeed decreased substantially during the last 15 years (either by simple regressions or via extensive econometric techniques). We can cooperate on this topic as I would be very glad to change my opinion in this regard. It would be much more politically feasible to argue that natural rate of unemployment is going down, but, unfortunately, the data do not give me such opportunity.

7)O. Blanchard wrote: “[Latvian] unemployment …still stands at 16% today, far higher than any reasonable estimate of the natural rate”.

I never argued natural rate of unemployment in Latvia is as high as 16%.

By the way, what is your estimate of the natural rate of unemployment in Latvia right now? In the euro zone (no major structural breaks), natural rate of unemployment is 9% (OECD Economic Outlook, May 2011), and nobody seems to be amused on that. In Latvia, given large structural break at the beginning of 1990-ties (the effect diminished in size over time, but it is still present!), and the fact that during the last 20 years unemployment consistently exceeded that in the euro zone, I would expect somewhat higher natural rate: roughly 12%. If you think that natural rate of unemployment in Latvia is below 9%, it seems unrealistic. If you believe that the natural rate in Latvia is ~11% :), perhaps, we should cooperate on our research efforts rather than discuss my brainwashing skills or the lack of competence. It is not likely that any person in the world has monopoly on the truth.

+3
0
Atbildēt

0

Vineta Ungailo 28.05.2013. 13.41

tiktāl nu esam. latvieši (Latvijas iedzīvotāji) Latvijā par Latvijas problēmām diskutē angliski.

+1
-4
Atbildēt

1

menedžeris 28.05.2013. 13.17

Is Super eye suffering under the delusion that his posting was written in English?!

+4
0
Atbildēt

1

    lindapastare > menedžeris 28.05.2013. 16.16

    Galīgs offtopic, bet, lasot vārdu “delusion” šajā komentārā, radio tieši skanēja Instrumentu dziesmas fragmentiņš, un tur arī bija vārds “delusion”, un sakritība bija līdz milisekundei.

    0
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

Una Grinberga 28.05.2013. 12.34

Cits par bezdarbu – cits vēl joprojām par valodu! :)

+3
-4
Atbildēt

1

    Valdemārs Valdemārs > Una Grinberga 28.05.2013. 13.04

    Virsraksts gan liecina, ka raksts nav par ekonomiku, bet gan par to, ka oponents ir vai nu smadzeņu skalotājs, vai arī viņam trūkst kompetences. Šo dilemmu autori tā arī atstāj neatbildētu.

    +8
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

anesteeziste 28.05.2013. 12.19

Vai tad Latvijā oficiālā darba valoda zinātnē tagad būtu angļu?

+1
-4
Atbildēt

0

silvija_vitina 28.05.2013. 11.42

Šī laikam būs retā, ja ne vienīgā reize, kad es piekritīšu superacs pieejai.

Man personīgi nav īsti saprotams, kāpēc atbilde uz Latvijas Bankas ekonomista Oļega Krasnopjorova kritiku ir sniegta angliski. Vai O.K. dzimtā valoda ir angļu (un citu viņš nesaprot)? Vai angļu valoda ir dzimtā atbildes rakstītājiem un citā viņi nekomunicē? Vai atbilde ir paredzēta englishspeaking audience? Kur ir āķis?

+8
-2
Atbildēt

1

    Rota Jakuðka > silvija_vitina 28.05.2013. 14.30

    Atbilde ir angliski tāpēc, ka O.Krasnopjorovs savu “kritiku” ir nopublicējis arī angliski, un tur bija reakcijas/komentāri no cilvēkiem arī ārpus Latvijas. Ir arī citi kolēģi no dažādām starptautiskām institūcijām, kuri gribēja redzēt mūsu argumentus nopublicētā veidā, lai varētu atsaukties. Latviešu versiju pagaidām vienkārši nebija laika sagatavot, jo ir daudz neatliekāmo darbu, bet principā tas arī ir mūsu plānos. Mihails Hazans

    +5
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

Janis 28.05.2013. 11.19

Latvijā iegūti zinātniskie grādi, tituli, utml. neko nenozīmē.
Šis raksts tikai viens no neskaitāmiem piemēriem.

0
0
Atbildēt

1

Valdemārs Valdemārs 28.05.2013. 11.02

Mind control also known as brainwashing refers to a process in which a group or individual schematically uses unethically manipulative methods to persuade others to conform to the wishes of the manipulator(s). Do we believe in the evil intentions of Oļegs Krasnopjorovs? I don’t but I hardly agree to the alternative either. It looks that the title of article itself is a manipulation exploiting the false dilemma fallacy.

+3
-1
Atbildēt

3

dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 10.57

My greetings for the autohors of the article! I guess it very usefull and correct for all Latvian people communicate to each other in English. We do not need ignoramus language (bauru valoda)! We need civilizated language like English, because it were just English men who brought civilization to wild population of America, Africa and now for Latvian people.

I always try to communicate with aboriginal people in civilization languages, in Russian or English. And aboriginal people understand theese languages!

So, I appeal to you to communicate in civilization languages like English! Write articles in English! Be a civilized human beings, I please you!

+3
-9
Atbildēt

8

    Ivars Anševics > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 13.00

    I would suggest, that also Russian language is too small to survive. In the future world will speak only three languages – English, Chineese and Spanish. Territory of Russia will be populated by Chineese (as it already happens in Far East)and added to China . Some Russian-speaking population still will be living in rural areas in self-subsistence economy unable to fit modern world and be competitive.

    +9
    -1
    Atbildēt

    0

    Pastniece > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 15.28

    Jūs droši vien gribat teikt “I beg you” nevis “I please you”. “To please” nozīmē iepriecināt. :)

    +2
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

    ineta_rr > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 19.30

    Ja gribam spīdēt, tad visdrīzāk tika sajaukts „plead“ ar „please“ nevis „beg“, kas ir daudz negatīvākas nokrāsas vārds.

    +2
    -2
    Atbildēt

    0

    Pastniece > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 20.01

    Gribam spīdēt, un pilnīgi noteikti tur nebija domāts “plead”. Neticu, ka var sajaukt “please”/”plead”, ja pēdējais vārds ir vārdu krājumā. Nekad arī neesmu lasījis vai dzirdējis kādu ikdienā sakām “I plead you”. Vai Jūsu zināšanas un pieredze liecina par pretējo?

    +2
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

    Sandris Maziks > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 20.35

    super_e-y-e
    “Be a civilized human beings, I please you!”

    Man patīk!!! Vai sub-human mūs aicinās nolaisties līdz savas sugas brāļiem, bidlām.

    +1
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

    ineta_rr > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 20.43

    „If it please the court to introduce the writ of habeas corpus“ arī sadzīves valodā nedzird, bet tā vienalga ir pareiza un ļoti formāla angļu valoda. „Plead“ un vēl dīvainākus vārdus sanāk redzēt bieži, ja lasa par dažādiem tiesu procesiem.

    0
    -1
    Atbildēt

    0

    Pastniece > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 20.56

    Kura versija Jums šķiet ticamāka:

    a) portāla Ir.lv lietotājs super_e-y-e bieži apgrozās tiesu vidē vai arī daudz skatās “Law & Order” un nejauši pārrakstījās “please”/”plead”;

    b) portāla Ir.lv lietotājs super_e-y-e neveiksmīgi pārtulkoja “es lūdzu jūs / ja prošu vas”, piemirstot, ka “please” ir dažādas nozīmes kā apstākļa un kā darbības vārdam.

    :)

    +4
    0
    Atbildēt

    0

    ineta_rr > dace_roze_lmt_lv 28.05.2013. 21.08

    Varam tikai cerēt, ka tiešām nav pirmais variants, un nekādi seriāli tad nebūtu jāskatās, jo laba juridiskā izglītība ietver arī specialitātes angļu valodu.

    0
    -2
    Atbildēt

    0
@

Komentāri nav iespējoti šim rakstam

Saistītie raksti

Vēsture / 13. novembris
«Sirdskapitāls»
Viedoklis / 20. septembris
Kāpēc dzimtene nav mīļa?
Tēma / 4. augusts
Ir jāmainās!
Viedoklis / 7. jūnijs
No emigrācijas uz imigrācijas valsti – kādu labumu tas var dot Latvijas ekonomikai? 1
Pusdienās / 5. jūnijs
Investīcijas mājās