5 ms·

Substituting economics for politics is a failure

nonrandomstring 4y ago
The reason economics prevails over politics is not because its logic precludes public parks, healthcare or education. It's because ordinary people understand politics. Ordinary people have opinions and can give answers in the form of votes. With economics "It's maths, you wouldn't understand it" [1,2] Economics as a ruling credo is a retreat from the examinable, falsifiable and even arguable into the unassailable and arcane. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6928121.Cathy_O_Neil https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6928121.Cathy_O_Neil [2] https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_faith_in_big_data_must_end https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_fait...
egberts1 4y ago
Yep. We are reminded of Democrats leveraging an MIT economist to ram the Obamacare Act through Congress with obfuscated and funny mathematics. Now, it is twice the cost of health premium than before (after adjusting for inflation) and medical community is making banks. If they (economists) cannot perform a simple but recreatable scenario, they should not be writing a policy. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/11/republican-anger-over-jonathan-grubers-obamacare-comments-is-justified-democrats-used-the-mit-professors-words-to-attack-the-gop-first.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/11/republican-anger...
JoeyBananas 4y ago
If you consider policy that favors the economy over more perceived "noble" goals like more welfare, public housing, healthcare, more parks, etc., I'm not here to tell you that you're wrong. Everybody wants those things. If they could, the government would give them to people. The reason they don't is because they literally can't. So, the free market is what we are left with to get them. Policy that makes use of proper incentives is more successful, because like it or not the free market is what works, and the government has to work within that system.

The reason economics prevails over politics is not because its logic precludes public parks, healthcare or education. It's because ordinary people understand politics. Ordinary people have opinions and can give answers in the form of votes. With economics "It's maths, you wouldn't understand it" [1,2] Economics as a ruling credo is a retreat from the examinable, falsifiable and even arguable into the unassailable and arcane. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6928121.Cathy_O_Neil https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6928121.Cathy_O_Neil [2] https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_faith_in_big_data_must_end https://www.ted.com/talks/cathy_o_neil_the_era_of_blind_fait...

egberts1 4y ago

Yep. We are reminded of Democrats leveraging an MIT economist to ram the Obamacare Act through Congress with obfuscated and funny mathematics. Now, it is twice the cost of health premium than before (after adjusting for inflation) and medical community is making banks. If they (economists) cannot perform a simple but recreatable scenario, they should not be writing a policy. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/11/republican-anger-over-jonathan-grubers-obamacare-comments-is-justified-democrats-used-the-mit-professors-words-to-attack-the-gop-first.html https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/11/republican-anger...

JoeyBananas 4y ago

If you consider policy that favors the economy over more perceived "noble" goals like more welfare, public housing, healthcare, more parks, etc., I'm not here to tell you that you're wrong. Everybody wants those things. If they could, the government would give them to people. The reason they don't is because they literally can't. So, the free market is what we are left with to get them. Policy that makes use of proper incentives is more successful, because like it or not the free market is what works, and the government has to work within that system.