568
Economic "science"
(europe.pub)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2025
568 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
207 readers
4 users here now
Memes! A way of describing cultural information being shared. An element of a culture or system of behavior that may be considered to be passed from one individual to another by nongenetic means, especially imitation.
founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
How is this any different to the various incarnations of priests? Economists interpret budgets as if they’re dregs of tea leaves, and unemployment statistics like the entrails of a sacrificial animal.
It doesn’t matter how rigorously someone analyses scripture, the end result can only ever intersect with reality by accident.
Yeah, scientists do that too, as a geologist, the hardest of hard sciences pun very much intended
We look at crystals like the dregs of tea leaves and isotope ratios like they're the entrails of a sacrificed animal.
As a common heard saying on mines, 3 geologists will have 4 opinions
The difference is that economics is a social science, masquerading as a hard science. Nothing wrong with the social sciences but they often present themselves as though the results they've found are akin to a hard science experiment with the lowest R values on record. In fact, ironically, most economists tend to look down their noses at the other social sciences and I think it's causing them a lot of dukkha.
Ironically, it's the social sciences that would help them realise that their discipline was already enough, as it was, all along.
The real problem came when neoclassical economics was rebranded as "just basic economics!" and not one of many conflicting, equally supported, schools of thought.
When did I say that any of them were bullshit? Can you not make up things i didn't say and then argue against that instead please?
I literally said that the subject was already good enough, as it was. How did you miss that?
Okay, so, I'll try again, which bit is the part where I said the subject was bullshit? From the looks of it, it does seem as though you just made it up and argued against that, instead of what I said.
Interesting that you left out the part where I said it was always good enough all along thought. Then again, I guess that part does really shit all over the nonses you're spewing doesn't it?
At this point I'm concerned that you genuinely can't tell the difference between the words I used and "all economics is bullshit."