You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Economics is a Very Dangerous Science
I enjoyed your point of view, but argue that no credible economist ever favored Marxism or communism. They're just silly theories (more probably hypotheses) that any economist can easily see past. Keynes was a hack and doesn't deserve a footnote in history (like his hero Marx). If you read Adam Smith, there isn't a single equation in the whole book (Wealth of Nations). Economics isn't about numbers, it's about how people organize themselves to see that certain basic needs are met. Like all pseudo-sciences, economics has adopted math to give the appearance of legitimacy- tragic! And, I'm an economist.
I vaguely remember so-called economists like Galbraith and another one who praised the USSR "achievements" in development right before it collapsed...
And yes, economics is about human action, not numbers. You should be more exact and say that NEOCLASSICAL economics is a pseudo-science. I'm still traumatized by my miserable failure of that macro test where I had to mindlessly (I didn't) remember an integral equation about temporal preferences
I can relate but, Thank God, school is far in the rear-view now. What I find most useful when analyzing economic growth is a venn diagram. I look at everything in terms of an interactive relationship between three components and how they support one another- political, social and economic. I look for variables/indicators within all three spheres and if/how they maintain a dynamic equilibrium...from an historical perspective. It's an incredible amount of work, but almost always accurate. I did it when NAFTA was being debated comparing the two "NAFTA's" and was able to predict a mass migration North.
Yes, exactly...economists in the 20s and 30s, especially, praised the "achievements" of communism. Some lamented that there was no way market economies could keep up with such an organized system that set national priorities and mobilized all resources to achieve them. Hilarious and sad in retrospect!
I share your cringe factor re: macro!
I remember a political-economy class given by a former bureaucrat. He had such contempt for freedom that he told be go "get down from Mount Pelerin" in the first draft for a final essay. It ended up with at most 1/4 government praise and 3/4 near-anarchist stuff; I ended up with A+ nonetheless for the class.
Wow, it's sad when educators let their ideology bleed into the classroom. However, i certainly understand how easy it is to let that happen!
As you can probably tell by now, i have a bias towards freedom and human dignity, so it's hard not to let them come through when i teach. Still, i try to be as unbiased as possible, agnostic on the surface, and encourage students to think for themselves. I'd NEVER consider dinging someone's grade for disagreeing on a principle.
Then I salute your integrity. That's probably why I could never become a teacher: not only are my pedagogical talents very limited, but I don't think I could "objectively" grade a socialist paper, lest it would include an "interview" afterwards to see if the students' arguments can face intense scrutiny
I agree with the "no credible" economist point. Plenty of them had PhDs, published in leading economic journals, and were university professors. And also agree with the math. the tools are extremely useful, especially the stats, just need to keep conclusions within scope and not over extrapolate.
Amen! Some of the most incredibly stupid people I have ever met have had Ph.D.'s...they view the world through the myopic lens of academia and have little or no real world experience. I was in my 40's when I went to college (was almost 50 when I got my MA) and was about the same age as a lot of profs. I had a little home handyman business going and had a guy with a Ph.D marvel because I knew how to change a doorknob! I told him, John, it's two fucking screws! There's only one way it can be done....He told me he would never have figured it out. I became very suspicious as to whether or not I was spending my education dollars wisely lol!
Stats can be useful as long as we keep in mind that things, particularly in finance, change rapidly.
btw, i also know how you must have felt going back to school in your 40s...in my mid-30s now, i'm the old man in the phd program...my peers tend to be about a decade younger, on average.
At first I was terrified...I had no formal education (except 3 mos of adult-ed) so I thought I was going to way over my head. I was saddened to see how woefully unprepared those kids were. On the other hand, I was about the same age as a lot of the profs so I mostly hung around with them.
Ha!!! Hilarious re: the doorknob story. I tend to think our society has over-invested in formal education (bc of top down policies), which largely neglects very important alt forms of education people learn on the job.
Especially when guys coming out of welding schools are going to work (right away) for $50 per hr.
Absolutely...contrast that to 4 years of partying in college for $100,000 and learning things that have fractional contribution to your life and future productivity.