3 ms·

This is a joke. It's not a Nobel Prize. It's a propaganda award given to promote economics. I have a question, how many "Nobel Prize" winning economists does

by socrates1998 13y ago

This is a joke. It's not a Nobel Prize. It's a propaganda award given to promote economics. I have a question, how many "Nobel Prize" winning economists does it take to lose billions of dollars in a hedge fund? The answer: 2. Why? Because economists are generally idiots and don't worry about "real world" applications. They just enjoy listening to themselves talk and win awards. Edit: I just looked over the paper. They make no predictions about the future. They just say "it is possible to make longer term predictions." Again, since they don't make any predictions, how can this be considered science?

davidw 13y ago
> economists are generally idiots That's the sort of inquisitive, open minded, intellectually curious, fact-based sort of approach to the world that I like to see on Hacker News.
- socrates1998 13y ago
  My problem with economists is they call themselves scientists, yet have very little actual "science". Science means, reproducible, testable and predictable ideas. Economists use curve fitting formulas on past data, then call it science. And, worse, they defend each other. I have taught economics, worked at hedge fund and studied economics in college. They work at banks and governments, then use "science" to justify stealing money from the people they are supposed to be helping. What happened to all the economists after the recent world economic crisis? They didn't lose their jobs. They weren't held responsible for their horrible risk-analysis. So, yes, they are idiots.
  - zmk_ 13y ago
    And of course economics==financial economics. You have a very narrow definition of science as well. If in X years penicillin stops working altogether because of anitbiotic resitant bacteria will you start calling biology/medicine not a science?! Economics deals with an ever changing enviroment.
    - socrates1998 13y ago
      > And of course economics==financial economics. Yes, because of the huge influence of the leading economists have on the world today. Economics, in general, is plagued by poor research, poor results, and bad logic. They help shape fiscal, monetary and economic policy, yet make horrible risk assessments, horrible predictions and believe their own bullshit. >Economics deals with an ever changing environment. Economics is way more complicated than people will admit. How can you model 7 billion people interacting? It's impossible. Yet, they give these charlatans huge salaries, awards, real power in government and don't hold them accountable. The leading economists (with a couple exceptions) still don't admit they don't know anything and won't adjust their thinking.

davidw 13y ago

> economists are generally idiots That's the sort of inquisitive, open minded, intellectually curious, fact-based sort of approach to the world that I like to see on Hacker News.

socrates1998 13y ago
My problem with economists is they call themselves scientists, yet have very little actual "science". Science means, reproducible, testable and predictable ideas. Economists use curve fitting formulas on past data, then call it science. And, worse, they defend each other. I have taught economics, worked at hedge fund and studied economics in college. They work at banks and governments, then use "science" to justify stealing money from the people they are supposed to be helping. What happened to all the economists after the recent world economic crisis? They didn't lose their jobs. They weren't held responsible for their horrible risk-analysis. So, yes, they are idiots.
- zmk_ 13y ago
  And of course economics==financial economics. You have a very narrow definition of science as well. If in X years penicillin stops working altogether because of anitbiotic resitant bacteria will you start calling biology/medicine not a science?! Economics deals with an ever changing enviroment.
  - socrates1998 13y ago
    > And of course economics==financial economics. Yes, because of the huge influence of the leading economists have on the world today. Economics, in general, is plagued by poor research, poor results, and bad logic. They help shape fiscal, monetary and economic policy, yet make horrible risk assessments, horrible predictions and believe their own bullshit. >Economics deals with an ever changing environment. Economics is way more complicated than people will admit. How can you model 7 billion people interacting? It's impossible. Yet, they give these charlatans huge salaries, awards, real power in government and don't hold them accountable. The leading economists (with a couple exceptions) still don't admit they don't know anything and won't adjust their thinking.