rbavocadotree

No, lots of economists don't. Especially considering how important of a problem it is. It's a "hot topic" because of public opinion at the moment. We have not been attacking it in new and creative ways for decades.

The fact that the field thinks it is a solved problem is a marvelous example of what the essay is talking about!

Two areas where I have a little experience:

Economics: There are surprisingly little people studying very large, grand, topics such an inequality. You've probably heard of the handful of economists that do. It's unfashionable due to the influence of the Chicago school and it's focus on free market principles, as well as many other factors.

Physics: Good luck getting any interest or funding if you are not studying the currently dominant theory in your field (even if there has been no progress in decades).

Plus it's not like they are just handed out and you're on your own. A nice man or woman in a suit will spend many hours sitting beside you teaching you everything you want to know. And anytime you are confused you press the help key twice and you are connected with someone who will take you through step by step what to do. And this isn't outsourced IT support. It's a person in New York who knows the product really well.

Once you have a few terminals at your firm, Bloomberg will provide a dedicated router + tunnel on top off the regular security. The bad actor would likely need to be internal to Bloomberg, and at that point there is nothing you can do.

That's actually what is happening a lot of the time. The humans are just monitoring and stepping in when needed or when they get bored.

A trader has an idea about what inflation will look like in 2025-2030 (The 5 Year period starting 5 years from now).

Lots of other people have ideas about the same thing, so there is a product you can buy or sell to bet on it.

She asks her broker what price they can buy or sell it. The broker asks how much she wants and gives a price.

This conversation is so common that there is an agreed upon structure for it. Bloomberg parses all your conversations and provides you with an aggregated view of all quotes brokers have offered you. You can then chart/do whatever you want with this data.

Despite not having children, I like hearing about my coworker's and friend's kids. Complaining about them can get old, but funny stories and things they are proud of are great to hear. I don't think I'm unique in this.

Huh? Why would you expect any of that in this letter?

It's funny reading all the debate about different wordings because it totally misses the point. The wording doesn't matter, only the delivery does. The recipients's interpretation of the question depends on who is saying it and how they say it. Whether or not they include the word "just" is irrelevant. Any single one of the phrases mentioned can be delivered in a way that causes offense or doesn't.

Maybe you forget how many hours are in a day? After 40h a week at starbucks you can't consult, teach, sit on multiple boards, and program everyday.

Also, I've worked as a barista. My high paying tech job is waaaay easier.

I learned most of this in school. Did everyone else not?

My partner is a grade 2 teacher, and she covers a lot of this. Everything in learning skills, individual skills, social skills, and most of our world.

You probably just don't recognize it when it's taught at a level understandable to six year olds, or 14 year old. Before writing posts like this it's a good idea to go look at a your school board's curriculum. You'll likely be surprised how closely it matches this.