Talk:Binary economics: Difference between revisions
imported>Janos Abel mNo edit summary |
imported>David Hoffman No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[[User:Janos Abel|Janos Abel]] 06:31, 14 May 2007 (CDT) | [[User:Janos Abel|Janos Abel]] 06:31, 14 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
:Ran a search for "binary economics" on google scholar. Gets 64 hits with 4-5 authors. So this is a tiny topic (cp. "fractional-reserve banking" got 725). Since CZ has only 93 economics articles, this would be lower than low priority I'd think. How about an article on "macroeconomics" or "econometrics," or maybe "pareto optimal" (24,000 hits)? That's my view. [[User:David Hoffman|David Hoffman]] 09:22, 14 May 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 09:22, 14 May 2007
There was a useful discussion around an article on Binary Economics. An unresolved dispute occurred and as a result the article was withdrawn by the original author. However, the discussion had some important references to the fact that the issued raised in Binary Economics (a new paradigm of economic theory) need to be addressed.
Is that discussion available somewhere for reference and possibly for another attempt to produce an article on the subject?
Part of the difficulty lies in the paradigmatic nature of Binary economics: it is outside the conventional framework of economic thought (although it is not just original research). I believe that there must be a way of treating such "heretic" subjects and still comply with citizendium/wikipedia standards.
Janos Abel 06:31, 14 May 2007 (CDT)
- Ran a search for "binary economics" on google scholar. Gets 64 hits with 4-5 authors. So this is a tiny topic (cp. "fractional-reserve banking" got 725). Since CZ has only 93 economics articles, this would be lower than low priority I'd think. How about an article on "macroeconomics" or "econometrics," or maybe "pareto optimal" (24,000 hits)? That's my view. David Hoffman 09:22, 14 May 2007 (CDT)