5 ms·

Economics IS a science. This anti-Economics bias rears its head whenever people find economic evidence contradicts their ideological narrative. It's similar to

Economics IS a science. This anti-Economics bias rears its head whenever people find economic evidence contradicts their ideological narrative. It's similar to the anti-Medicine bias exhibited by anti-Vaxxers, who frequently cite the many mistakes made by the Medical establishment and orthodoxy, in an attempt to discredit it. >>Unfortunately it also has one of the worst children mortality rate among the 36 most developed countries The correlation between per capita GDP and quality of life is not perfect, yet it's there nonetheless. Pointing out an outlier doesn't invalidate my point that development is generally a measure of per capita productivity. And while we're on the subject: the US has unique attributes that have nothing to do with its economy, that result in higher infant mortality statistics. For example, the US has a much higher proportion of its population of sub-Saharan African ancestry, which is a cohort that has higher infant mortality rates in European countries as well. The US also has the best neonatal facilities in the world, with a much higher proportion of premature infants being counted as live births and subsequently cared for, than the norm in the developed world. Counting the deaths of premature babies as infant deaths, instead stillborn, is the biggest contributor to the US having higher infant mortality rates. The rest of your comment is you veering even further from the subject matter, to attack the US. This shallow and overly emotional treatment of Economics doesn't do the complexity and importance of the subject justice.

romanoderoma 6y ago
> Economics IS a science It is not Not because I am anti economics, but because there is no proof available > it's similar to the anti-Medicine bias No, it is not My parents are doctors I know the difference > The correlation between per capita GDP and quality of life is not perfect, yet it's there nonetheless. That's an understatement! If the country with the largest GDP cannot even keep babies alive like Estonia can do, it must mean something... > For example, the US has a much higher proportion of its population of sub-Saharan African ancestry, I come from a country where hundreds thousands of people come from Africa every year Have you ever had an emperor that ruled your continent born in Africa? Because I do! Your arguments are weak at best Are you a racist? Because, you know, people coming to US from central Africa are not that many, unless you count slaves brought there 300 years ago. If 300 years are not enough to treat them like everybody else, I guess there's a problem... > has higher infant mortality rates in European countries as well. It actually does not We have an universal healthcare system that takes care of everybody regalrdelss of where they come from > The US also has the best neonatal facilities in the world, Proof? > to attack the US. I do not make the statistics > This shallow and overly emotional treatment of Economics doesn't do the complexity and importance of the subject justice. Show me then what makes US better than Nigeria if I don't want to be shot in the streets...
- CryptoPunk 6y ago
  >>Not because I am anti economics, but because there is no proof available Yes, it is. Scientific proof is not available in economics, but that doesn't make it not a science. You're disagreeing with academic consensus on what economics is when you claim it is not a science. >>My parents are doctors >>I know the difference That you have these advantages and are exhibiting this clearly ideologically motivated anti-science bias is even worse. >>Have you ever had an emperor that ruled your continent born in Africa? What the hell does that have to do with anything? >>Are you a racist? Again, what do these despicable attempts at character assassination have to do with anything I argued. >>It actually does not People of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Europe DO have higher infant mortality rates.. >>Proof? Do some research on the causes of higher infant mortality rates in the US. It mostly comes down to more pre-term births being counted as live births, and the deaths of these infants being counted toward infant mortality statistics, instead of being counted as stillbirths.
  - romanoderoma 6y ago
    > Yes, it is. Scientific proof is not available in economics, but that doesn't make it not a science. It literally does. > That you have these advantages A doctor parent in Italy is not advantages, my parents come from poor families, are born during the ww2 and studied a lot to get there, working hard while studying to support their families They are now retired and worked their whole.life for the public healthcare systems, they weren't high paid surgeons the like you see in US TV shows, they simply wanted to help people, not get rich. That's why they never made a lot of money. It is possible in countries where studying doesn't mean taking a loan of hundreds thousands of dollars, but it's almost free for everybody You know that thing you hate there, called social welfare? Makes miracles, especially for keeping babies alive. > What the hell does that have to do with anything? That most of us in Italy have African ancestry in our DNA > People of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Europe DO have higher infant mortality rates.. They don't. Look at France, 8% of the population comes from Africa, their infant mortality rate is 35% lower than the US Not 1,2 or 3% less as one would expect from the richest country in the World, 35% less It means US has 1.5 times worse infant mortality rate than France Every 2 in France in US there are 3 That's a very large difference! What's the explanation for having a 3.625 times worse infant mortality rate than Estonia whose GDP is so low that it is measured in billions? > Do some research on the causes of higher infant mortality rates in the US. Do some research on what make other countries have a better record than US There are at least 33 of them BTW what's your excuse for the mass shootings or the homicide rates worse than countries controlled by warlords or having the lowest life expectancy of the west? Are those traits that actually make US better than, for example, Sweden? Can you prove in any meaningful way that growth = general wellbeing? I mean, without blaming black people if you can...

romanoderoma 6y ago

> Economics IS a science It is not Not because I am anti economics, but because there is no proof available > it's similar to the anti-Medicine bias No, it is not My parents are doctors I know the difference > The correlation between per capita GDP and quality of life is not perfect, yet it's there nonetheless. That's an understatement! If the country with the largest GDP cannot even keep babies alive like Estonia can do, it must mean something... > For example, the US has a much higher proportion of its population of sub-Saharan African ancestry, I come from a country where hundreds thousands of people come from Africa every year Have you ever had an emperor that ruled your continent born in Africa? Because I do! Your arguments are weak at best Are you a racist? Because, you know, people coming to US from central Africa are not that many, unless you count slaves brought there 300 years ago. If 300 years are not enough to treat them like everybody else, I guess there's a problem... > has higher infant mortality rates in European countries as well. It actually does not We have an universal healthcare system that takes care of everybody regalrdelss of where they come from > The US also has the best neonatal facilities in the world, Proof? > to attack the US. I do not make the statistics > This shallow and overly emotional treatment of Economics doesn't do the complexity and importance of the subject justice. Show me then what makes US better than Nigeria if I don't want to be shot in the streets...

CryptoPunk 6y ago
>>Not because I am anti economics, but because there is no proof available Yes, it is. Scientific proof is not available in economics, but that doesn't make it not a science. You're disagreeing with academic consensus on what economics is when you claim it is not a science. >>My parents are doctors >>I know the difference That you have these advantages and are exhibiting this clearly ideologically motivated anti-science bias is even worse. >>Have you ever had an emperor that ruled your continent born in Africa? What the hell does that have to do with anything? >>Are you a racist? Again, what do these despicable attempts at character assassination have to do with anything I argued. >>It actually does not People of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Europe DO have higher infant mortality rates.. >>Proof? Do some research on the causes of higher infant mortality rates in the US. It mostly comes down to more pre-term births being counted as live births, and the deaths of these infants being counted toward infant mortality statistics, instead of being counted as stillbirths.
- romanoderoma 6y ago
  > Yes, it is. Scientific proof is not available in economics, but that doesn't make it not a science. It literally does. > That you have these advantages A doctor parent in Italy is not advantages, my parents come from poor families, are born during the ww2 and studied a lot to get there, working hard while studying to support their families They are now retired and worked their whole.life for the public healthcare systems, they weren't high paid surgeons the like you see in US TV shows, they simply wanted to help people, not get rich. That's why they never made a lot of money. It is possible in countries where studying doesn't mean taking a loan of hundreds thousands of dollars, but it's almost free for everybody You know that thing you hate there, called social welfare? Makes miracles, especially for keeping babies alive. > What the hell does that have to do with anything? That most of us in Italy have African ancestry in our DNA > People of sub-Saharan African ancestry in Europe DO have higher infant mortality rates.. They don't. Look at France, 8% of the population comes from Africa, their infant mortality rate is 35% lower than the US Not 1,2 or 3% less as one would expect from the richest country in the World, 35% less It means US has 1.5 times worse infant mortality rate than France Every 2 in France in US there are 3 That's a very large difference! What's the explanation for having a 3.625 times worse infant mortality rate than Estonia whose GDP is so low that it is measured in billions? > Do some research on the causes of higher infant mortality rates in the US. Do some research on what make other countries have a better record than US There are at least 33 of them BTW what's your excuse for the mass shootings or the homicide rates worse than countries controlled by warlords or having the lowest life expectancy of the west? Are those traits that actually make US better than, for example, Sweden? Can you prove in any meaningful way that growth = general wellbeing? I mean, without blaming black people if you can...