Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Nat Dyer

@natjdyer.bsky.social

3.6K followers 720 following 880 posts

My book RICARDO’S DREAM - a 'simply brilliant' critique of mainstream economics - came out in Nov '24. Fellow of Schumacher Institute. Formerly with Global Witness & PEP. www.natdyer.com

Posts Media Videos Starter Packs

Pinned

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · Nov 26

It's publication day!
bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/trade/ricard...

Author Nat Dyer - a white man in his 40s with beard - holds a copy of his new book 'Ricardo's Dream: How Economists Forgot the Real World and Led Us Astray' with a wall and vines in the background.

10 28 100

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 6d

Disagree. That's just one mode of science. Much of science is progressed through long, patient observation of facts and a disinclination to fit phenomena into neat boxes too soon.

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 8d

Yay! This is EXCELLENT news. Delighted for you 😀

1 1

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 8d

From his recent, useful post on how economics lost its soul, which is similar to my thinking

www.theglobalcurrents.com/p/how-econom...

How economics lost its soul

Universities are training economists who can build models but don't understand the economy

www.theglobalcurrents.com

1 2

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 8d

Perhaps this from @haugejostein.bsky.social helps provide an answer - it's just an extension of the same narrow, technocratic, 'physics-envy' attitude that dominates econ

'Far too many economists are concerned with how a change in measured variable X affects measured variable Y rather than asking normative, important questions such as: Is capitalism preferable to socialism? What are the global consequences of China’s rise in the world economy? What are the limits of looking at climate change purely through the lens of market failures? In fact, I’ve met many economists who say that they think economics is a ‘hard science’ that should be unconcerned with these types of questions. Both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, two of the most important figures in classical economics, would turn in their graves if they heard this. Despite their political differences, these two scholars approached economics in a similar way. They both understood that economics is shaped by human values, social norms, and ideologies. According to Smith and Marx, to be an economist is also to be a philosopher.'

3 7

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 8d

I might write something about this kind of comment (left on @unlearnecon.bsky.social recent video).

I see no value at all in 'proving' in a perfectly contextless world that countries A & B could benefit form trading X & Y.

What makes anyone think this logic then maps onto reality?

Comment that reads: 'I understand that the example of England and Portugal maybe only worked because of the slaves and the gold, that doesn't matter for the sake of the argument, as well as the moral value of that episode. You can change the names of the countries for fictional ones, and change the products for letters like product A and B. for the argument you are making in this video you have to prove mathematically that the theorem doesn't work. And if the perfect scenario in which it work is unattainable, you have to explain why it will always be unattainable and then put the example in numbers if you don't do that, then, as you said you don't understand the theorem of comparative advantage. You really don't get this or in reality you really are not interested with anything else but to prove your point even if it rests on flawed logic?'

3 12

Reposted by Nat Dyer

Unlearning Economics @unlearnecon.bsky.social · 16d

NEW VIDEO: The Death of Free Trade youtu.be/XsOYGt7EKG8

The Death of Free Trade

YouTube video by Unlearning Economics

youtu.be

5 20 48

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 9d

Me talking about David Ricardo & comparative advantage on the excellent @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social pod

Pitchfork Economics @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social · 11d

“Free trade is always a win-win!”

Except… Ricardo’s famous example leaves out the exploitation, slavery, and mountains of stolen Brazilian gold that made it work.

Listen to the full episode here: buff.ly/jQUTct6

1 3

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 9d

😆

Reposted by Nat Dyer

Unlearning Economics @unlearnecon.bsky.social · 15d

THIS IS NOT A DRILL! My actual book launch event - which is only 6 months late - is at LSE October 13th, you can sign up here:

www.lse.ac.uk/events/why-w...

1 12 46

Reposted by Nat Dyer

Zane Selvans @zaneselvans.org · 14d

Good video essay from @unlearnecon.bsky.social riffing on Ricardo’s Dream, about politics & power relations that exist alongside “free” trade and profoundly shape commerce. And the recent, mysterious “rediscovery” 🙄 of this fact by previously dominant states.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsOY...

The Death of Free Trade

YouTube video by Unlearning Economics

www.youtube.com

1 4

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 9d

I've listened to a lot of Pitchfork Economics over the years so it was a real pleasure to be a guest on the show.

Listen here: buff.ly/jQUTct6

Pitchfork Economics @pitchforkeconomics.bsky.social · 14d

David Ricardo’s math looked beautiful on paper. The real-world outcome? Exploitation, colonialism, and hollowed-out economies. In the second episode of our trade series, Nick & Goldy talk to @natjdyer.bsky.social about his book Ricardo’s Dream.

🎧Listen here: buff.ly/jQUTct6

1 1

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 9d

Thanks so much for having me on the show, Goldy! The team did an excellent job on the edit too. I've been away but will give this a boost now

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 16d

I had to deleted Bluesky app from my phone again... just get too sucked in otherwise & it's not great for productivty or my mood.

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 20d

Good to see this out!

1 2

Reposted by Nat Dyer

Sam Freedman @samfr.bsky.social · 20d

All political tribes can be hypocritical but the right's current level of hypocrisy on free speech is deliberate. It's an assertion of power not a blindspot.

55 780 2.8K

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 21d

I’m not brilliant at social media but that’s a strange response. I actually referred to two other peoples’ books above & I’ve consistently tried to answer you constructively 🤷‍♂️

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 21d

I’m struggling to see this as a genuine engagement, but I’ll try one more time.

If you want me to name names, here’s a few to start: David Ricardo, Robert Lucas, James Mirrlees, Robert Merton, Myron Scholes, William Nordhaus.

All succumbed to the ‘Ricardian Vice’ in one way or another.

1 1

Nat Dyer @natjdyer.bsky.social · 21d

Isn’t the difference also just the sheer number of people & volume of communication?

It’s become popular in some political circles to talk about splitting candidates into ‘insiders-outsiders’ rather than ‘left-right’, with all the energy on the ‘outside’ which makes some sense.