SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the how-bad-can-something-called-the-dismal-science-be? dept.
An Anonymous Coward writes:
Economics affects us all, so why do so many remain ignorant of the fundamentals? Murray Rothbard said: "[I]t is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance."
Personally I'm tired of having to defend economics against both the mainstream advocates (with their broken models) and their critics (who tar economics with one brush). I take the time to educate myself and speak out, based on reason, not angry ignorance, and not on smugness, numerology, and appeals to the authority Lord Keynes.
There is a deep-seated tendency for people to misapply physical science techniques to the social sciences. This has resulted in mainstream economics degenerating into a modern day numerology. However there are intellectually sound schools of economics that do not attempt to treat human actions like Newtonian atoms.
This article from The Mises Institute discusses how and why mainstream economics has lost its way.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 19 2016, @07:46AM
I agree it is a shoddy 'science'. The problem is the systems they build. Almost all of them work. Only however in a very particular set of conditions.
It is when those conditions are no longer met or the actual real system changes they have no clue. They actually do not model chaos very well at all.
They usually measure things with *very* *very* simple algebra and sometimes trigonometry. When they need to be using 20+ level deep calculus measuring change of a system over the range of variables as they change inside of a diff eq matrix. They try to shoehorn everything into a simple x/y grid when it is a multilevel dimensional thing.
Then even IF they could get the math right (which they have not). Then *only* if they could actually measure things properly. They have tons of made up things to measure with no proper way to actually measure them.
So when they model things everything goes sideways because they have no possible way to measure overall spending velocity anxiety for the average household or business. When that sort of thing is 'kinda constant' they can actually make some predictions. But when it starts moving around (for reasons they do not know) all of their formulas are garbage.
These dudes then make huge sweeping statements and write books that are bunk. Some political dudes actually take them seriously. Then those very plans meant to help people do the exact opposite. They honestly have no idea why. Because they do not actually understand the system at all.
How do I know this? When I was getting my degree in it as well as a math and comp sci degree not once did they show any calculus. Not once did they show how to map a surface into another one. Things they should have been doing. Instead we were doing simple linear algebra reductions and point slope intersections. To say the least I was bored to tears. None of the taught literature has it. Some of the more advanced guys have a hint of it. But many do not understand the system. They only understand parts of it. Economics does not have its own 'e=mc^2' moment yet. Micro econ and macro econ are two distinct fields of economics. Yet they do not have a real way to connect them. Much like special relativity and relativity. It all comes unglued quickly with little reason to as to why.