3 ms·

The Nobel Prize in Economics Is Fake

28 points by 77pt77 2y ago

josefritzishere 2y ago
Alfred Nobel invented dynamite so there is some precedent for destructive innovations here.
karaterobot 2y ago
> Economics is not a science. Not like Literature, or Peace.
- readthenotes1 2y ago
  You're both right:)
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
frikskit 2y ago
I don’t think anybody cares what Nobel’s family member’s protests were about. Does anyone even bother to learn their names or know a single thing about their lives? It’s also not “fake” and the university didn’t invent it. The point is there is a prize that many/most people agree is one of the top recognitions of achievement for the field. Whether you call it Nobel or something else, doesn’t change a thing for anyone, as long as the prize is well known and well regarded.
- TZubiri 2y ago
  "Whether you call it Nobel or something else, doesn’t change a thing for anyone" Ok if you believe that, stop calling it a Nobel prize then. Win win
  - 77pt77 2y ago
    Well, not like that!...
- jhbadger 2y ago
  But still, the bank that created the prize went to an awful lot of effort to make it seem like it was a Nobel. There are awards in every field. Advertising executives even have an award of their own called the Clio. Imagine if they had been so bold as to name it "The Clio Award in Memory of Alfred Nobel". Would it make sense to call it "The Nobel Prize in Advertising"?
  - piva00 2y ago
    The bank that created the prize is also the Swedish Central Bank.
- stavros 2y ago
  "Whether you co-opt a famous prize to give legitimacy to yours, or use some other prize, doesn't change a thing for anyone, as long as the prize is equally famous" is a bit of a tautology.
BurningFrog 2y ago
Correct: It's not a real Nobel prize Wrong: Economics is a science, and very important one.
- KevinMS 2y ago
  > Wrong: Economics is a science, and very important one. a social science, in other words, a racket
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  Economics is worse than psychology and that's saying something. Failed sciences
- BurningFrog 2y ago
  If you look closer, Economics is at least two sciences, with the unfortunate names Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. Microeconomics, better named Price Theory, which deals with supply and demand curves, is very important and successful. We can now understand things that were completely misunderstood 1-2 centuries ago, and the world is a much better place for it. Macroeconomics, OTOH, may have an impossible task. The system it tries to understand is aware of the science and alters its behavior as soon as something new is discovered.
vouaobrasil 2y ago
Technically correct, but considering that the official Nobel organization endorses the prize on their website, it's a little bit of a stretch to call it a "fake". From nobelprize.org [1]: > The economics prize was established much later and is a memorial prize, as indicated by its full name: the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. Its addition was an exception, to celebrate the tercentenary of Sweden’s central bank in 1968. Of course, I do understand where the author is coming from. Economics as a discpline has large, shady pieces. But I think some of that shadiness exists in the Nobel organization itself.... [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/frequently-asked-questions/#categories https://www.nobelprize.org/frequently-asked-questions/#categ...
maxverse 2y ago
> Economics is not a science. It is more like history, a set of useful methods but nonetheless highly colored by the current political mood. > Crucially, economics also lacks the basic accountability mechanism that real sciences have: data. Bad theories in biology or physics disappear when new data repudiates them, but bad theories in economics never go away. Lost me there. This is just sensationalist.
- 77pt77 2y ago
  The interesting part is: > Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA
- llimllib 2y ago
  Peace, famously, is easy to judge objectively; that's why it gets a nobel
  - 77pt77 2y ago
    Kissinger still got it without peace in Vietnam.
    - readthenotes1 2y ago
      Obama got it for winning an election while being half-white...
      - karmakurtisaani 2y ago
        Actually Obama got ot for closing Guantanamo, bringing peace to Middle East and withdrawing from Afghanistan. Or for the hope that he would do any of that, can't remember exactly right now..
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- 7thaccount 2y ago
  It is sensationalist, but there is a small kernel of truth. Economists have major physics envy and want desperately to be a full mathematically based science, but it's more of a social science (as in not hard science). Doing regression models on the economy is obviously somewhat flawed. There is an experimental branch of economics that does repeatable experiments though, so some practicioners are probably pretty close. There are a lot of things economists almost universally agree on (e.g. price caps bad), but there are big differences in schools of thought. Politicians can choose a la carte and can find an economist to agree with them on practically any policy.
donohoe 2y ago
economists carried out bloodless coups of central banks around the globe, co-opting the essentially arbitrary and political matter of setting interest rates for themselves. Interest rates not set by politicians? I think thats been a societal good - though I worry that the independence of the Fed could be undermined by the next president depending on how things go. [...] bolstered economics as a tool for governing technocratically and shutting down people who disagree with the elite consensus The dawn of a new conspiracy theory. Economics is not a science Correct. Lets qualify that - it is a social science. This is a stated thing and not hidden. No one claims its a science on the level of physics or chemistry. economics also lacks the basic accountability mechanism that real sciences have In that sense, yes - its a social science. It is not the same. I defer to others on how that is good/bad but the comparison is off. I don't think the author knows what economics really is (which is shocking "Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA"), but hey, he made the front page on HN.
- opo 2y ago
  >(which is shocking "Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA"), Honestly it wouldn't have surprised me if it said he was in his second year of high school. Can someone who upvoted this, explain why they upvoted this submission?
  - forgetfreeman 2y ago
    Certainly. After 45 years of observation of economists tanking national/regional/global economies, cheerlead neoliberal bullshit that contravenes the most basic principles outlined in an econ 101 textbook, and in general standing behind policy that creates shit outcomes for ~ 98% of the nation, the skepticism starts to set in in earnest. The lack of empiricism alone in the social sciences should be sufficient to dismiss them out of hand. The fact that one has been promoted to the notional captain's chair of the world economy beggars belief. And on a personal note I get off on watching folks get kicked in the worldview, so dude's screed is guaranteed to rattle all the right cages.
    - TimK65 2y ago
feyman_r 2y ago
It is the 'Nobel Memorial Prize' [1], not the Nobel Prize. The former is official, the latter is unfortunately colloquial now. >> The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, officially the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel[2][3][4] (Swedish: Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne), is an economics award funded by Sveriges Riksbank[5] and administered by the Nobel Foundation. Although not one of the five Nobel Prizes established by Alfred Nobel's will in 1895,[6] it is commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics,[ << [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...
syntaxing 2y ago
No one ever said Economics is purely a natural science. Studying a specific time period or "current political mood" is not the aspect that determines whether its a "science". Following the scientific method is what's important. With the author's logic, all social science is Fake.
- forgetfreeman 2y ago
  Given social science's penchant for producing untestable theories and valueless navel-gazing there's at least some footing available if someone wanted to plant that flag.
- stavros 2y ago
  ...yes.
zeroonetwothree 2y ago
> Bad theories in biology or physics disappear when new data repudiates them String theory?
- 77pt77 2y ago
  No direct data and no predictions. The safest of bets.
satisfice 2y ago
Next you’ll tell me that tomatoes are not vegetables.

28 points by 77pt77 2y ago

josefritzishere 2y ago

Alfred Nobel invented dynamite so there is some precedent for destructive innovations here.

karaterobot 2y ago

> Economics is not a science. Not like Literature, or Peace.

readthenotes1 2y ago
You're both right:)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

frikskit 2y ago

I don’t think anybody cares what Nobel’s family member’s protests were about. Does anyone even bother to learn their names or know a single thing about their lives? It’s also not “fake” and the university didn’t invent it. The point is there is a prize that many/most people agree is one of the top recognitions of achievement for the field. Whether you call it Nobel or something else, doesn’t change a thing for anyone, as long as the prize is well known and well regarded.

TZubiri 2y ago
"Whether you call it Nobel or something else, doesn’t change a thing for anyone" Ok if you believe that, stop calling it a Nobel prize then. Win win
- 77pt77 2y ago
  Well, not like that!...
jhbadger 2y ago
But still, the bank that created the prize went to an awful lot of effort to make it seem like it was a Nobel. There are awards in every field. Advertising executives even have an award of their own called the Clio. Imagine if they had been so bold as to name it "The Clio Award in Memory of Alfred Nobel". Would it make sense to call it "The Nobel Prize in Advertising"?
- piva00 2y ago
  The bank that created the prize is also the Swedish Central Bank.
stavros 2y ago
"Whether you co-opt a famous prize to give legitimacy to yours, or use some other prize, doesn't change a thing for anyone, as long as the prize is equally famous" is a bit of a tautology.

BurningFrog 2y ago

Correct: It's not a real Nobel prize Wrong: Economics is a science, and very important one.

KevinMS 2y ago
> Wrong: Economics is a science, and very important one. a social science, in other words, a racket
kelseyfrog 2y ago
Economics is worse than psychology and that's saying something. Failed sciences
BurningFrog 2y ago
If you look closer, Economics is at least two sciences, with the unfortunate names Microeconomics and Macroeconomics. Microeconomics, better named Price Theory, which deals with supply and demand curves, is very important and successful. We can now understand things that were completely misunderstood 1-2 centuries ago, and the world is a much better place for it. Macroeconomics, OTOH, may have an impossible task. The system it tries to understand is aware of the science and alters its behavior as soon as something new is discovered.

vouaobrasil 2y ago

Technically correct, but considering that the official Nobel organization endorses the prize on their website, it's a little bit of a stretch to call it a "fake". From nobelprize.org [1]: > The economics prize was established much later and is a memorial prize, as indicated by its full name: the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel. Its addition was an exception, to celebrate the tercentenary of Sweden’s central bank in 1968. Of course, I do understand where the author is coming from. Economics as a discpline has large, shady pieces. But I think some of that shadiness exists in the Nobel organization itself.... [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/frequently-asked-questions/#categories https://www.nobelprize.org/frequently-asked-questions/#categ...

maxverse 2y ago

> Economics is not a science. It is more like history, a set of useful methods but nonetheless highly colored by the current political mood. > Crucially, economics also lacks the basic accountability mechanism that real sciences have: data. Bad theories in biology or physics disappear when new data repudiates them, but bad theories in economics never go away. Lost me there. This is just sensationalist.

77pt77 2y ago
The interesting part is: > Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA
llimllib 2y ago
Peace, famously, is easy to judge objectively; that's why it gets a nobel
- 77pt77 2y ago
  Kissinger still got it without peace in Vietnam.
  - readthenotes1 2y ago
    Obama got it for winning an election while being half-white...
    - karmakurtisaani 2y ago
      Actually Obama got ot for closing Guantanamo, bringing peace to Middle East and withdrawing from Afghanistan. Or for the hope that he would do any of that, can't remember exactly right now..
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
7thaccount 2y ago
It is sensationalist, but there is a small kernel of truth. Economists have major physics envy and want desperately to be a full mathematically based science, but it's more of a social science (as in not hard science). Doing regression models on the economy is obviously somewhat flawed. There is an experimental branch of economics that does repeatable experiments though, so some practicioners are probably pretty close. There are a lot of things economists almost universally agree on (e.g. price caps bad), but there are big differences in schools of thought. Politicians can choose a la carte and can find an economist to agree with them on practically any policy.

donohoe 2y ago

economists carried out bloodless coups of central banks around the globe, co-opting the essentially arbitrary and political matter of setting interest rates for themselves. Interest rates not set by politicians? I think thats been a societal good - though I worry that the independence of the Fed could be undermined by the next president depending on how things go. [...] bolstered economics as a tool for governing technocratically and shutting down people who disagree with the elite consensus The dawn of a new conspiracy theory. Economics is not a science Correct. Lets qualify that - it is a social science. This is a stated thing and not hidden. No one claims its a science on the level of physics or chemistry. economics also lacks the basic accountability mechanism that real sciences have In that sense, yes - its a social science. It is not the same. I defer to others on how that is good/bad but the comparison is off. I don't think the author knows what economics really is (which is shocking "Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA"), but hey, he made the front page on HN.

opo 2y ago
>(which is shocking "Ben is in his second year of UChicago’s JD-MBA"), Honestly it wouldn't have surprised me if it said he was in his second year of high school. Can someone who upvoted this, explain why they upvoted this submission?
- forgetfreeman 2y ago
  Certainly. After 45 years of observation of economists tanking national/regional/global economies, cheerlead neoliberal bullshit that contravenes the most basic principles outlined in an econ 101 textbook, and in general standing behind policy that creates shit outcomes for ~ 98% of the nation, the skepticism starts to set in in earnest. The lack of empiricism alone in the social sciences should be sufficient to dismiss them out of hand. The fact that one has been promoted to the notional captain's chair of the world economy beggars belief. And on a personal note I get off on watching folks get kicked in the worldview, so dude's screed is guaranteed to rattle all the right cages.
  - TimK65 2y ago

feyman_r 2y ago

It is the 'Nobel Memorial Prize' [1], not the Nobel Prize. The former is official, the latter is unfortunately colloquial now. >> The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences, officially the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel[2][3][4] (Swedish: Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne), is an economics award funded by Sveriges Riksbank[5] and administered by the Nobel Foundation. Although not one of the five Nobel Prizes established by Alfred Nobel's will in 1895,[6] it is commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics,[ << [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...

syntaxing 2y ago

No one ever said Economics is purely a natural science. Studying a specific time period or "current political mood" is not the aspect that determines whether its a "science". Following the scientific method is what's important. With the author's logic, all social science is Fake.

forgetfreeman 2y ago
Given social science's penchant for producing untestable theories and valueless navel-gazing there's at least some footing available if someone wanted to plant that flag.
stavros 2y ago
...yes.

zeroonetwothree 2y ago

> Bad theories in biology or physics disappear when new data repudiates them String theory?

77pt77 2y ago
No direct data and no predictions. The safest of bets.

satisfice 2y ago

Next you’ll tell me that tomatoes are not vegetables.