4 ms·
> "A friend of mine once said: You know what the problem is with being an economist? Everyone has an opinion about the economy. That's the problem with all pse
by cityhomesteader 8y ago
> "A friend of mine once said: You know what the problem is with being an economist? Everyone has an opinion about the economy.
That's the problem with all pseudosciences - politics, social sciences, etc. Everyone has an opinion and they can't provide any empirical tests to get at the truth.
That's the difference between a science like physics and a pseudoscience like economics.
It's why two economists with contradictory views can win a nobel prize at the same time.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/business/3-american-professors-awarded-nobel-in-economic-sciences.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/15/business/3-american-profe...
It's fundamentally nonsense.
> Nobody goes up to a geologist and says, 'Igneous rocks are fucking bullshit.'"
Because a geologist can show you that igneous rocks are not "bullshit". Empirically, physically. They can provide empirical tests to differentiate an igneous rock from bullshit.
- rory096 8y agoOver 60% of macro papers published are empirical. Hell, that article you linked includes the phrase "carefully assembled evidence." https://www.aeaweb.org/research/charts/an-empirical-turn-in-economics-research https://www.aeaweb.org/research/charts/an-empirical-turn-in-...
- citrablue 8y agoIf economics is crap, what should we base economic and fiscal policies on?
- null000 8y agoI think that the point is that "economist says" should be the beginning of a debate, not the end - it's a data point, but not conclusive evidence in favor of or against whatever's being referenced in most situations
- citrablue 8y agoUnsure why you were downvoted - wasn't me. What other inputs into the decision should be included? I'm kind of at a loss as to what other approaches would complement an economic one, even acknowledging the severe limitations of the discipline.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]