Microeconomics Principles

share ›
‹ links

Below are the top discussions from Reddit that mention this online Coursera course from University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Offered by University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Most people make the incorrect assumption that economics is ONLY the study of money. ... Enroll for free.

Reddsera may receive an affiliate commission if you enroll in a paid course after using these buttons to visit Coursera. Thank you for using these buttons to support Reddsera.

Taught by
Dr. José J. Vázquez-Cognet
Clinical Professor
and 18 more instructors

Offered by
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Reddit Posts and Comments

1 posts • 45 mentions • top 17 shown below

r/UIUC • post
13 points • poxto28
For those of you who have never taken Econ 102 with Professor José Vázquez, Coursera is hosting a course of it starting June 12.
r/UIUC • post
4 points • Polymerrs
Econ 102 with Vazquez

Is anyone taking Econ 102 with Vazquez right now / took it with him last semester or so? I heard he ramped up the difficulty, so I'm trying to figure out whether to take it with him or with Dilanni.

Also, is his coursera course at all related to the actual class?

r/AskEconomics • comment
2 points • lawrencekhoo

If you are using a standard US microeconomics text, I've found this course from Coursera to be pretty good.

r/australia • comment
1 points • oldgrayman

I know it, I hate it.

Dude... Hire ME! I will destroy everybody I come in contact with and all your equipment.


Are you insane?

Learn the first and second fundamental theorems... a JG is BAD economics.

Maybe not all the things you want done by the government, but it's not a JG...

How would you guarantee employment to a deliberately destructive crackhead? I mean, why not, I can't be fired... I'm getting paid anyway.

EDIT: Start Here: https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics

r/serbia • comment
5 points • brokendefeated



Sloman - Economics 10th ed 2018


Microeconomics (10th Edition) (Pearson Series in Economics) - Michael Parkin

Microeconomics by David C. Colander 9th Edition[Kalinel.DU]

Rondo Cameron - A Concise Economic History of the World_ From Paleolithic Times to the Present-Oxford University Press, USA (1993)

Principles of Economics - Mankiw


r/australia • comment
1 points • fuckfree93

Here, do this course to get a more intuitive feel for the laws of supply and demand: https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics

r/neoliberal • comment
1 points • RunawayMeatstick

So I was going to tell you to just take 101 online, and I did a search and lo and behold my Alma mater has its econ 101 course for free online and it's taught by my old favorite professor! Jose was the man. Take his class. He was always making up problems like calculating the fair market price for weed and then asking us if we'd pay that much (this was way back when it was still definitely very not legal). Pretty sure the guy is a stoner. Loved his class.

r/australia • comment
1 points • sexy69gurl

Dude, you are calculating if saving money by murdering prisoners represents a positive or negative externality... and get this, it get's funnier... to society... LOL!

I just truly cannot help with your level of ignorance.

It hurts my head knowing people think that way.

Utility isn't how much we're paying on someone's pension... it is their expression of subjective value through choice.

You need to actually learn microeconomics before you could even begin to start making sense... You are so deep over your head here that what you wrote isn't even wrong... it's nonsense.

Do you know how utility can be summed and compared?


Then go find out...


r/academiceconomics • comment
1 points • HurdyGrudy

I think that it will depends of what university and what course of Micro I you are enrolled. For example, if it is more likely an introductory micro (like this one here) you barely don't need calculus at all, but if you are trying to pursue a major in economics, it is good for you catch up with a basic calculus course, you will need this to understand some fundamental concepts like the marginal cost and utility, MRS - Marginal Rate of Substitution, obtain a maximum point of a function and maximize with restrictions, just to say a few.

It depends a little of the professor who are giving the lectures, some of them (type I) will give more calculus concepts, and will require it more. Others (type II) will give you more the intuition, focusing in simple differentials (I'm saying those simpler ones with ΔX or ΔY) and recurring to calculus only when it extremely needed.

That said, I'm myself a professor, but I teach far away from US, in fact, far away from developed world. Down here our track courses are somewhat different, but I used to be more like type I professor 10 years before and nowadays more like type II (on undergrad course, for graduate courses I require calculus as well).

r/Indian_Academia • comment
1 points • YouKnowWho7777

https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics#syllabus It's the best introduction you can find

r/AskLibertarians • comment
1 points • hotmeth

I might give a longer answer later, but you don't understand what I'm getting at...

There is no assumption that these things are true, when they are true everyone is as well off as they could be (in their own opinion), and when they are violated some people could be made better off without making anyone else worse off.

This has nothing to do with money, it has to do with your ability to make the choices you most want to make. The only reasonable definition of freedom I know of... Free to make your own choices without harming others.

Regulating in accordance with the assumptions isn't telling people what to do... It's ensuring competition, or when there isn't competition, how to adjust for it... ensuring information, through labelling laws, truth in advertising and fraud laws... externalties exist when you impose on (or benefit) others in ways they did not willingly choose to be involved in... the price does not account for those who are not involved in the transaction, and so regulations are how to internalise the cost or benefits not included.

A UBI is at the poverty line, (yes, you need a reasonable definition for this)... This means you are free NOT to work... meaning you can negotiate your wage and conditions from a position of poverty, not starvation... the usual incentives to work continue to exist, but it is no longer on the basis of slavery (how is having to work not slavery).

The second fundamental theorem basically proves this is possible (with the constraint that there is enough for everyone, which we passed more than a century ago).

I always suggest people do an online fundamentals or principles of economics or microeconomics course... https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics should be accessible to most without an advanced understanding of mathematics.

r/perth • comment
2 points • freefags93

Thank you most sincerely. Mostly I get voted down, vilified and even banned on occasion for comparing smoker's rights to gay rights... or arguing for meth and heroin to be legalised.

If you want some starting points on this matter I have some suggestions.

If you want to get a general feel for economic thinking see https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics

If you want a deep mathematical understanding of economic principles see https://www.edx.org/course/principles-of-economics-with-calculus

Keep in mind that economics is the study of human choice, and so is very relevant to these questions. The most annoying thing is that so few people know it, and when you know it, you will see how backwards most people's understanding is... and the result is that they are poorer and have less freedom... what can you do?

Finally, for a philosophical argument that we should not harm others even for their own benefit, unless they are causing harm to others (not to themselves) then you should read John Stuart Mill's essay 'On Liberty' (Highly, highly recommended).

> Mill states that “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”

In economic terms, you can only make people worse off by harming them or imposing extra costs upon them.

It's not surprising you hold those views though, they are very popular and are the result of carefully crafted propaganda... Most people support public health care (as they should, for the benefit of their children, family, friends and neighbours, unless you like watching them die of easily treated illness)... and yet people now think that smokers should pay for their own health care costs... this is just a way to discredit public health care in general and lower the taxes of the most wealthy.

The drug war is similar? Who profits the most from the drug war? Without the drug war, the mafia (drug cartels) would be out of business entirely. You can bet they are spending a reasonable amount of money on politicians and others to maintain the status quo.

All the best, and thanks again.

r/economy • post
4 points • pawsys
What is the best short to medium length tutorial, online course, or book that will explain the principles of economy?

So far, I found these resources (not yet sure about their quality because I didn’t went through them). Any comment on the one below or any guidance on the topic will be strongly appreciated.

  • Principle of Economics – online course from Stanford (https://lagunita.stanford.edu/courses/HumanitiesSciences/Econ-1/Summer2014/about)
  • MicroEconomy – online course from MIT (https://courses.edx.org/courses/course-v1:MITx+14.01x+2T2017/course/)
  • Microeconomics Principles from University of Illinois (https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics)
  • Khan Academy has pretty extensive Economy 101 course (though, as it is usually the case with Khan Academy, it is not very concise)
  • GameTheory – online course by Stanford (https://www.coursera.org/learn/game-theory-1)

r/science • comment
1 points • QuestionableAI

Friend ... as much as I want to help you, a course in Econ 101 would be of value to you... or here, try some of these: 1)https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/economics/ I'd suggest the following... they are quite good.

https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics I think you might enjoy it... it is informative and free.

r/Wallstreetsilver • comment
1 points • Dsomething2000

You are twisting a word to your new meaning. I think you should use a different word than bubble. But your logic is correct. However it is in a bubble and no matter who owns it, it will fall as all bubbles do.

There is a wonderful micro economics class on Coursera.com by a college In Illinois, I recommend you take the class.


r/AustralianPolitics • comment
1 points • Jman-laowai

>No dude... reddit comments are not designed to explain the first fundamental theorem of economics in...

My point is that if you can't articulate your point in a plain manner and can only use technical terms and fail to explain how they are connected to your point, you probably don't have much of a point. Writing something that other people don't understand and then refusing to elaborate, doesn't make you smart, it makes you a poor communicator.


It's like I said "no, you are wrong, look up the theory of relativity dude, it's not my job to educate you". All that says to me is that you don't feel confident in backing up what you are saying; you have also failed to clearly articulate what you mean, so I (conveniently for you) am unable to refute what you said (which was basically nothing).


>Here's the proof: https://www.edx.org/course/principles-of-economics-with-calculus

Here's something to get you in the ballpark: https://www.coursera.org/learn/microeconomics


Just started studying economics in Uni I see? I guess you know it all now.


>But ask an economist... tobacco taxes are not pigovian, they do not correct for an externality or other distortion, and therefore must give rise to deadweight loss... and deadweight loss can more or less be measured in lives lost...

You can ramble as much as you want, the simple fact is that the tobacco excise has be shown to be closely correlated with decreasing rates of smoking.



>Smoking taxes kill.

The thing is, I did give you at least one way that they cause problems...

I buy my tobacco from a mate of John Kizon... I know they murder people in order to bring me that tobacco... how else could it possibly work... but you think this is a good thing?

I'm going to say the amount of murders caused by the smoking tax are significantly less than the number of people who would have died from smoking.

Each year in Australia there are just over 200 cases of murder; now most of these are cases of intimate violence. The most common murder is between male acquaintances who get into an argument and someone looses their temper. There's also domestic incidents among other reasons.

Money/drugs only account for 15% of male victim and 7% of female victim murders. Considering that roughly 2/3rds of homicides are male victims, we can say roughly 12% of homicides are due to money/drugs.


Now, amongst these murders, surely some of them are purely financial disputes, so lets cut it in half and say 6% of murders are over drugs; we're talking about 12 plus murders a year due to drug disputes. Now let's compare this for the number of deaths due to smoking:




Woopdee doo! Twenty four thousand. Quite close, only two thousand times more than the murders caused by drug disputes.

Also, out of these illegal drug disputes, how many are caused by disputes over illegal tobacco? Let's be (very) generous, and say half. 6 murders per year caused by tobacco excise. Therefore, smoking rates would only need to decrease by more than 0.025% for it to save more lives than it supposedly cost, based on your unsubstantiated claim that the tobacco excise is causing underworld murders.

It's pretty well established that the tobacco excise has drastically cut smoking, maybe you can argue the figures (based on stuff you pulled out of thin air); but you'd be pretty hard to convince someone that it didn't at least persuade on in every four thousand people to give up smoking.

r/AskEconomics • comment
1 points • LucidChinaThoughts

MIT OpenCourseWare

I haven't watched them, but I'm assuming they're more mathematical intense as it's from MIT. If you want a more intuitive understanding:

Also, on Coursera: