imported>Nick Gardner |
imported>Chris Day |
| (181 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{awelcome}} Regards, [[User:Anton Sweeney|Anton Sweeney]] 17:36, 8 September 2007 (CDT) | | {{archive box|auto=long}} |
| | == Rest In Peace == |
|
| |
|
| ==Economics articles==
| | RIP Nick Gardner. You were one of most prolific editors on CZ. Many of your wonderful articles were featured. ([[User:Chunbum Park|Chunbum Park]] 20:05, 1 July 2013 (UTC)) |
| Thanks for your contributions to economics articles: they are a massive improvement! I hope we can bring on board some more economists [retired or otherwise] to help with the CZ effort. The wikipedia approach to economics is a far cry from what I would consider clear and erudite thinking on these issues, and I would like to avoid repeating that on CZ. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 16:44, 17 September 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| : Thank you for your words of encouragement. I am intrigued with the possibility of conveying the basic ideas of economics in simple verbal logic without the aid of equations and diagrams. I may try that approach on the main economics article.
| | My condolences to Nick's family. He was a great contributor to this project and he leaves behind much wonderful work. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 21:13, 1 July 2013 (UTC) Addendum: I would like to link to Nick's [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,4390.msg46149.html#msg46149 final forum post], which contains good advice for us all. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 12:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC) |
| : I need some advice, however. I should like to see much of what is written in that article transferred to an article on the history of economics thought. I suspect that to be beyond the power of an author? If so, how could it be arranged? [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 02:55, 18 September 2007 (CDT) | |
|
| |
|
| :: I don't see why it is beyond the power of an author, as long as there is no opposition. I am not opposed, and the main author of these economics articles left CZ. Put the proposal on the Talk page, so that it is all transparent, and people can object if they want [they won't!]. Wait a few days, then go ahead. Message me when you have done it, so I can check it out. Seems ok in principle, to me. Bear in mind that other people may come along later and modify things, but this is true for all articles on CZ. We control such changes with editorial oversight. --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 17:03, 18 September 2007 (CDT)
| | Desperately sad at this news. He was a fine scholar and writer. [[User:Gareth Leng|Gareth Leng]] 08:21, 2 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ::: Will do. Nick | | Nick was truly a scholar and a gentle man. He worked diligently to create a coherent series of articles on basic economics, all of which were of high quality. He contributed to more than 80 articles. When he died, Nick was working on a second edition of his book called "Mistakes". His son John will continue to edit the book for readability and work to get it published. We wish him luck, and condolences for his loss. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 21:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ==Workgroup label==
| | Condolences to Nick's family. May he rest in peace. [[User:Mary Ash|Mary Ash]] 04:39, 3 July 2013 (UTC) |
| Forgive me for changing your page, but the Workgroup label is only for articles. I saw that you appeared on the Economics list as an article :-) Best wishes --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 07:21, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
| |
|
| |
|
| == Hi Nick! ==
| | Thoughts and condolences to Nick's family. May he rest in peace. [[User:JeromeDelacroix|Jérôme Delacroix]] 09:55, 3 July 2013 (CEST) |
|
| |
|
| Do you feel shy about coming to the [[CZ:Monthly Write-a-Thon|Party]]? Or did you not know about it? Not sure? What the devil is this person talking about?? Click on the link, come on in and edit an article. Or start a stub. Or ask a question. Eat something at [[bar|Hayford's Bar and Grill]]. Or just drink some [[vodka]] or [[navy grog|grog]]. Or [[beer]]. What the hey! [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 16:11, 7 November 2007 (CST)
| | Sad news, I'm glad I got to read Nick's work here, especially during the crash of 2008. I have not head of his book "Mistakes" so I'm intrigued to read the new edition after John has finished. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 02:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC) |
| | |
| == Approval of some economics articles==
| |
| Nick, I think we should go for approval of some of the developed articles: the process may bring in some more comments, but otherwise we will just go ahead with your texts. I will make some minor edits first, and any comments that occur to me in the process of looking more carefully. Can you suggest which articles you would like nominated? I think Microeconomics and History of Economic Thought are looking good. Possibly Economics and Macro... Tell me whzt you think, and let's try to get these done! Best wishes, --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 06:05, 11 November 2007 (CST)
| |
| | |
| == [[Microeconomics]] ==
| |
| | |
| Congratulations o your first of many Approvals! --D. Matt Innis 18:43, 16 November 2007 (CST)
| |
| | |
| Two down, 1000 to go! [[Competition policy]] --[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 19:19, 21 November 2007 (CST)
| |
| | |
| Also, my thanks to the most important contributor in Economics on CZ !! --[[User:Martin Baldwin-Edwards|Martin Baldwin-Edwards]] 19:32, 21 November 2007 (CST)
| |
| | |
| == Subpages ==
| |
| | |
| Nick- make sure that the talk page has the <code><nowiki>{{subpages}}</nowiki></code> placed at the top <code>;)</code>. Also, when you fill out the metadata page, make sure to also include the name of the page in both the "Page name" and "abc" fields. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 10:46, 4 February 2008 (CST)
| |
| :Also, another tip: The definition template is used as follows: [[Template:Def_nameofthinghere]], for example see: [[Template:Def_Ice_hockey]]. --[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 09:12, 6 February 2008 (CST)
| |
| | |
| == [[Gross Domestic Product]] ==
| |
| | |
| Congratulations on approval! [[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 10:55, 26 February 2008 (CST)
| |
| | |
| ==Careful!==
| |
| | |
| Please be careful typing in page-names. You created [["Bank for International Settlements]] (note extra "), <s>but we already had [[Bank for International Settlements]]</s>. You should move any useful content to the second, and we will delete the (erroneous) first one. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 16:52, 7 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| Ah, I see, you just created [[Bank for International Settlements]] - I went to move the former one to the right place, and the move failed, and so I assumed it was a pre-existing page which you didn't see because of the ". If you ever need to move a page to a different name for any reason in the future, can you please use the "Move" tab (at the top)? Please never use cut-and-paste to move a page, as we need to keep the page history intact for copyright reasons. (In this case there's no harm, because you're the only author.) Thanks! [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 17:08, 7 April 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == Hey sorry I can't give better feedback on economic articles ==
| |
| | |
| Hey Nick,
| |
| I saw your forum post and glanced through a couple of your articles. I wish I knew more about economics and could contribute. I would suggest linking all of the articles in the forum post so people can click on them and give feedback. [[User:Tom Kelly|Tom Kelly]] 15:55, 11 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == Revisions to user page ==
| |
| | |
| I am open to reasoned suggestions about how to present my user page, but I am not prepared to allow uninvited alterations, even if well-intentioned.[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 16:03, 12 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| :In that case you did the right thing. :) Sometimes its just easier just to show rather than tell. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 16:10, 12 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == Draft for article diminishing returns ==
| |
| | |
| Hi Nick, thanks for your [[User talk:Paul Schächterle/Notebook/LDR|comment]]! I have replied there. I am new to Citizendium. Can you tell me whether it is better to reply on the author's page or to reply where the comment has been made? Greetings! --[[User:Paul Schächterle|Paul Schächterle]] 13:14, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| I'm no expert on CZ protocol either. I suggest you ask an editor. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 16:18, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| ==Sabbatical==
| |
| I do not wish to cause offence by not replying to messages, so I should explain that I have embarked upon an indefinite sabbatical from CZ, and for that reason I shall not be responding to messages posted here, except on matters directly concerned with articles that have been put forward for approval. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 15:30, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| : :-( Sorry to hear that. Hope you'll be able to add more at some point; we all did notice all your work, we're just busy elsewhere. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 16:20, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| :: Thank you. I appreciate your support and I am quite prepared to wait - especially for initiatives from fellow-economists. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 16:32, 15 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| :: As far as I can tell, there has been no activity of any sort among the economics authors in the past two months, but I have returned to the extent of dipping a toe into the water that lies at the interface of economics and sociology ([[social capital]]) and I am waiting to see if I get any response there. I am not holding my breath! I might try behavioral economics next. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 04:56, 6 July 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| :: Attempts to provoke the sociology authors failed, and nothing seems to have disturbed the torpor of the economics authors, but I plan to continue to probe the interdisciplinary aspects of economics with a foray into philosophy, in the hope of finding some response there. There must be life out there somewhere! [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 16:21, 28 July 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == [[International economics]] ==
| |
| | |
| Way to go! --[[User:D. Matt Innis|D. Matt Innis]] 21:23, 22 May 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == Hello ==
| |
| | |
| Thanks for you e-mail. In fact i've been waiting for a French citizendium to be launched, but since there nothing new about this...
| |
| | |
| Of course I can comment your article if you ask me. Maybe can you correct my English for it is not my native language. I am currently working on [[IS/LM model]] but [[opportunity cost]] should be checked too (my English in particular).
| |
| | |
| I'll try to convince some friends who are waiting for a French version to try to contribute in English. For that I need to finish [[IS/LM model]] to prove it is possible.--[[User:Sylvain Catherine|Sylvain Catherine]] 10:37, 12 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| | |
| Hello Sylvain
| |
| | |
| I had no particular article in mind - I should welcome your comments on any that I have contributed to. They are listed in my user page [http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/User:Nick_Gardner].
| |
| | |
| I should be happy to help with your English (which in any case seems good).
| |
| | |
| I am glad that someone is working on IS/LM: I had been putting it off because I don't like drawing diagrams.
| |
| | |
| I'll have a look at both articles before long, and comment on them on their talk pages.
| |
| | |
| [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:19, 12 September 2008 (CDT)
| |
| | |
| == Your recent work ==
| |
| | |
| You've been doing a great job with the contributions you've made recently regarding the current debacle. I just wanted to swing by your talk page and thank you for your hard work. So... Thanks! --[[User:Joe Quick|Joe Quick]] 15:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| : Indeed. I'll repeat my comments from a while back - we're a small crew, stretched thin, and so most are busy elsewhere, but your contributions are both noted and valued. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 16:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Thank you both for your encouraging messages. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 18:11, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Hang in there! ==
| |
| | |
| Are you sorry you started [[crash of 2008]] yet?
| |
| | |
| Hang in there, I know it's a pain when something gets nominated for approval, seems suddenly everyone and his brother has something to say on the topic, but even though it may not seem like it, everyone really is trying to help, not--I repeat, NOT--trying to find fault with your work!
| |
| | |
| [[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 22:49, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| : I like it! It's stimulating - far better than being ignored. But thanks for your reassuring words. Much appreciated. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 22:58, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :: While I'm here, let me echo Aleta's wise words! [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 18:47, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| :: PS: Seems like you may have gone from too little feedback to too much, in one fell swoop! :-) [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 18:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I had hoped - as ever - to attract contributions from professionals in economics and finance, and to raise the quality of the article by exchanges with them. Apart from some help from Martin - a very busy man - that hasn't happened. I can't deny that that has been a disappointment. But your contributions have been a great consolation, Noel, and I am still enjoying the challenge. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 21:24, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Draft/Definition==
| |
| | |
| Since 'Draft' is ambiguous (and likely to need to be disambiguated), [[Draft/Definition]] might be better at [[Bank draft/Definition]]. [[User:J. Noel Chiappa|J. Noel Chiappa]] 18:47, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == lost glossary? ==
| |
| | |
| Nick, are you looking for this page? [[Subprime_mortgage_crisis/Glossary]]. When Martin moved the article he created a new metadata template and did not add the glossary tab. So, despite the subpage existing, it does not show up as a link at the top. [[User:Chris Day|Chris Day]] 15:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Thank you Chris. I withdrew my complaint when I realised that much of what had disappeared was in any case redundant. I have put an edited version in its place. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 15:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Your testimony ==
| |
| Please [[CZ:Why I contribute to CZ|let us have it]]! If you're willing, of course... --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 21:07, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I have tried - I hope it is what you wanted. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 08:32, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Always being careful in areas where I lack expertise... ==
| |
| | |
| Two things came together for me on seeing your work on [[Banking]]. Last night, I was rereading John Keegan's ''The Mask of Command'', in which he talks about military and economic competition/styles. One of his points was that there became a reversal of models, probably sometime in the early nineteenth century, and at least in military terms.
| |
| | |
| Up to that point, mercantilism and colonialism, to use game-theoretic terminology, used a zero-sum model, where the initial capitalism was non-zero-sum: more individual participation in security-funded firms gave the better-capitalized firm more opportunity to create wealth. In contrast, the national-level mobilization of Napoleonic armies turned warfare more from controlled maneuvering, which is actually evident in much of medieval and primitive warfare, to total war (i.e., zero-sum).
| |
| | |
| The wheel seems to be turning again, with the financial markets (merger/acquisition, derivatives rather than direct valuation), etc., moving to zero-sum, while warfare, both through the destructiveness of highly industrialized forces and to what is available to insurgents, becomes non-zero-sum.
| |
| | |
| Anyway, you triggered these associations, which I think are useful. Where to put the military-economic game of strategy relationships, if others agree in this cyclic behavior, utterly baffles me. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 15:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Geometric series ==
| |
| | |
| I wrote [[Geometric series]] upon your request. --[[User:Paul Wormer|Paul Wormer]] 10:54, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| Instant satisfaction! Excellent! Many thanks. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 11:48, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Economic warfare ==
| |
| | |
| I've started an article on [[economic warfare]] as a subset of [[grand strategy]], but lack knowledge and examples in some areas. My strength is more intelligence and military; I know that there have been attempts to interfere with national resources in the worldwide financial markets, attack its currency, etc., but other than a few cases of counterfeiting, I don't know how the latter was done.
| |
| | |
| If you have any time to look at it, comments or text are very welcome. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I think it has the makings of a fascinating article on a fascinating subject - which, however is not one that I know much about. You have rightly touched on blockades as a major economic warfare strategy, and I suppose that you are aready planning to say more about it. And what about the Allied bombing raids on the Ploesty oilfields? And, as you probably know, the German WW2 submarine blockade was a brilliant effort which might have won them the war but for the Bletchley Park codebreakers. But you may not have heard about the abortive German attempt to damage the British economy by flooding it with forged banknotes? Nothing else occurs to me right now, but I'll keep thinking ..[[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 21:28, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :I am gemerally aware of banknote counterfeiting, done by skilled slave labor in concentration camps. A bit of it was used by captured spies, but, IIRC, some of the troops moving into Germany found chests of banknotes in a lake.
| |
| | |
| :There's a delicate line between economic warfare and strategic bombing (WWII terminology, now more generalized into strategic kinetic and nonkinetic strike). While there is a huge amount of controversy about the attack on German oil, I don't think of it as economic warfare. Certainly, oil had an immense role in the economy, but as far as I know, only military means were used to break the German oil industry. Ball bearings are different, in that there was a specific nonmilitary component where money was used to buy up the Swedish supply. I need to make that distinction more clear; while "economic warfare" is the strategic term of art, perhaps I should refer to "financial attack" to distinguish buying Swedish bearings from bombing Schweinfurt, although both were intended to create the same effect?
| |
| | |
| :Where I need the most help is in attacks through a financial market. I'm most familiar with those used against non-national groups, but I'm thinking more about actions taken against countries through market manipulation, reducing the value of government bonds, etc. It's only a vague recollection, but I thought the U.S., at one point, played some games in the sugar futures market specifically to affect Cuba's economy. The relationship between the Arab oil boycott and effects on countries it wanted pressure is very direct; the sort of things I don't understand, however, is where they may have used means other than reducing production and controlling exports -- things done in the financial markets. There have also been allegations that terrorist groups speculated in markets, expecting a crash after an attack; I tend not to put a lot of credence into such matters as they are a huge operational security risk.
| |
| | |
| :Britain did have a formal Ministry of Economic Warfare in WWII, although the US did not formalize it as much. While the US was unquestionably waging economic warfare on Japan in mid-1941, it was primarily to deal with Indochina; the US had no particular idea what effects it was having on the Japanese decision to launch much more aggressive war, which, in their minds, was for resources.
| |
| | |
| :I'm trying to focus on the things that were done deliberately. Few people in the West, as far as I know, looked at an arms race as a means to break the Soviet Union, although it became a large part of it. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 21:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| I understand, but I don't think I can help. You need to consult a finance nerd rather than an economist. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 06:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Laughing...see what I mean? I can make fine distinctions about interior and exterior ballistics for [[rocket science]], which is really rocket engineering, know the nuances of all sorts of medical and computer things and how to put together an intelligence estimate, but economics? finance? mostly baffle me. Yes, I can do things like CAPEX and OPEX in a business plan, but, in other areas, I know my limitations. (thinks of some editorial disputes) [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 14:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Deterrence, compellence and game theory ==
| |
| | |
| Noticing you contributed to [[game theory]], you might want to build on some specialized, often military, cases I am describing, such as [[compellence]] and [[deterrence]]. Compellence was an often flawed model used by U.S. decisionmakers in the [[Vietnam War]], who both assumed the opponent was a rational actor, but [[Cognitive traps for intelligence analysis|mirror-imaged]] the opponent with the assumption they had a common idea of rationality and optimal outcomes. I'll be continuing to expand on these, but I can't help remembering that the full title of Morgenstern and von Neumann's work was ''Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.'' [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 00:44, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Shakespearean reflections ==
| |
| | |
| I saw your plan to '''put flesh on the skeleton''' of "financial system". Where does Shylock's pound of it fit? Should it be given to him in advance? [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 18:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)the risks
| |
| :Certainly not! Along with other speculators in the bond market he will have to bear the risk that the issuer may default - and if he does there is also a possibility that his credit default swap insurance may not pay up. Then he will have to suffer the same fate as Lehman Brothers and the other money-grubbing investment bankers. Public opinion is definitely not on their side, and another bail-out is definitely out of the question. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 21:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Perhaps of use... ==
| |
| | |
| I created [[most-favoured-nation]] and [[Mercosur]]. While I'm no international economist, perhaps we can try to get in the WTO, G8, G20 and other politically critical groups. [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 16:41, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :MFN would certainly have an important place in an article on the WTO - and there ought to be such an article (I'll put om my list). In the meantime why not add a link to the WTO website
| |
| [http://www.wto.org/english/theWTO_e/whatis_e/tif_e/fact2_e.htm] ?
| |
| Incidentally your article does not make it entirely that MFN status applies to all fellow-members of the WTO. [[User:Nick Gardner|Nick Gardner]] 18:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
| |
