Gary Marcus

Rank 11 of 47
|
Score 83
8/10/2024, 11:37:05 AM
X
In reply to:
Frank Rundatz
@FrankRundatz
·
537d
@GaryMarcus These two charts show most of the contributing factors to inflation and they are completely the fault of the Federal Reserve that was trying to stave off a deflationary collapse from the shock of COVID.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
537d
Actual PhD level economists, what grade would you give this essay, if submitted by a graduate student?

To the extent that you would not give it an A, what would be your concerns?
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
538d
The rise in prices (inflation) is caused by government overspending, which increases the amount of money faster than the increase in goods & services output.

That is the vast majority of the problem.

Inflation was particularly bad during the Covid years, as there was massive…

The statement by @FrankRundatz constitutes public discourse as it engages in a substantive discussion about the factors contributing to inflation, specifically addressing the role of the Federal Reserve and other external factors such as supply chains and war. The tone is critical and aims to provide a broader perspective on the issue.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement strives to do no harm and instead aims to broaden the discussion by highlighting additional factors contributing to inflation. This aligns with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By pointing out the complexity of the issue and mentioning supply chains and war, the statement promotes understanding and empathy, recognizing that multiple factors contribute to inflation. This aligns well with promoting understanding and empathy. [+2]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by challenging the oversimplified view presented in the original tweet. It does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments, thus adhering to the principle of constructive criticism and dialogue. [+1]