• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: October 4th, 2023

help-circle





  • Yeah, I think there’s also a lot of tone-deafness among economists, that seems to reflect a lack of understanding (or at least acknowledgment) that the economy is built on—and designed to perpetuate—massive inequality. The average person derives comparatively little benefit from an economy which is—on paper—booming, because the profits are overwhelmingly siphoned off by the wealthy. This is probably mostly a problem with the way the economy is reported on by the media, but economists are the face of that.


  • Economics is a soft science. Economics is not about describing how things should work, economics is about describing how things do work.

    I mean, tell that to economists? In my experience, they are extremely dogmatic. With vanishingly few exceptions, every economist I’ve ever heard, seen, or read in any media acts as though whatever model they subscribe to is gospel, and that any issues you might have with it must therefore stem from a lack of understanding, rather than from the faulty assumptions underlying it.

    ETA a recent example: Harvard economics professor and former Obama economic adviser Jason Furman on Jon Stewart’s podcast.









  • I just think calling people bots and shills has no place in honest discourse and the brushstroke always tends to get bigger and bigger.

    Bots and shills have no place in honest discourse, but they obviously exist. Should we pretend they don’t—assume everyone is arguing in good faith, regardless of how blatantly dishonest and inconsistent they are? What would you suggest?

    I don’t disagree that there’s a slippery slope problem; there’s no shortage of fringe internet echo chambers that dismiss all dissenting opinions as coming from npc’s, cia shills, shitlibs, bloodmouths, breeders, <insert dehumanizing label>, etc.