Okay, but the only economists who believe in trickle-down bullshite are Austrian School clowns who aren’t taken seriously by the discipline as a whole
Well, they are taken seriously by… Every politician.
It would be like pointing to the 2% or so of climate scientist denialists as proof that there’s serious dissent as to the nature or seriousness of climate change inside of the discipline, when, in reality, there isn’t. It’s just politically convenient to pretend so.
May I remind you who drives economic policy? Checks notes… Politicians.
I mean, I’m not trying to say that morons and swindlers don’t have influence over the real world, I’m just saying that legitimate experts are generally trustworthy with regards to their field of expertise - if not necessarily in presenting the correct view, in at least presenting a supported view, and trickle-down is anything but. A fucking zombie theory only given life by horrific amounts of dark money, that makes everyone in economics academia retch when it enters the room.
Legitimate economic experts are still using the assumption that the world has infinite resources to be exploited, and therefore, we should have infinite growth…
So, color me skeptical on whatever the “economic experts” state. Because they also state privatization and commodification of social interactions is “Good actually”… Those same experts have “gifted” us enshittification.
Legitimate economic experts are still using the assumption that the world has infinite resources to be exploited, and therefore, we should have infinite growth…
… peak resources and diminishing returns of limited deposits are major topics in modern economics.
Don’t mistake modern economies with modern economics. Economists have as much control over economic policy in most cases as climate scientists have over climate policy.
… peak resources and diminishing returns of limited deposits are major topics in modern economics
So, they accept that inflation is bad, because inflation is a signal that resources are nowhere near maxed out, and basing an economic system on having inflation means said system expect infinite growth, in a finite set of resources, correct?
Don’t mistake modern economies with modern economics.
So, basically, economics are just a bunch of untested ruminations of academia then, and have no place in our decision making, correct?
Because, when “theory” meets the road, it just shows all those ruminations are just “Best guesses, based on faulty premises”.
So, they accept that inflation is bad, because inflation is a signal that resources are nowhere near maxed out, and basing an economic system on having inflation means said system expect infinite growth, in a finite set of resources, correct?
Jesus Christ. That’s not what inflation is.
So, basically, economics are just a bunch of untested ruminations of academia then, and have no place in our decision making, correct?
Economics is predicated on the study and prediction of economic trends. I don’t know how you got “Economics is untested” from “Economists have no control over economic policy”, even after a very clear and pertinent comparison with climate scientists.
Well, they are taken seriously by… Every politician.
May I remind you who drives economic policy? Checks notes… Politicians.
I mean, I’m not trying to say that morons and swindlers don’t have influence over the real world, I’m just saying that legitimate experts are generally trustworthy with regards to their field of expertise - if not necessarily in presenting the correct view, in at least presenting a supported view, and trickle-down is anything but. A fucking zombie theory only given life by horrific amounts of dark money, that makes everyone in economics academia retch when it enters the room.
Legitimate economic experts are still using the assumption that the world has infinite resources to be exploited, and therefore, we should have infinite growth…
So, color me skeptical on whatever the “economic experts” state. Because they also state privatization and commodification of social interactions is “Good actually”… Those same experts have “gifted” us enshittification.
… peak resources and diminishing returns of limited deposits are major topics in modern economics.
Don’t mistake modern economies with modern economics. Economists have as much control over economic policy in most cases as climate scientists have over climate policy.
So, they accept that inflation is bad, because inflation is a signal that resources are nowhere near maxed out, and basing an economic system on having inflation means said system expect infinite growth, in a finite set of resources, correct?
So, basically, economics are just a bunch of untested ruminations of academia then, and have no place in our decision making, correct?
Because, when “theory” meets the road, it just shows all those ruminations are just “Best guesses, based on faulty premises”.
Jesus Christ. That’s not what inflation is.
Economics is predicated on the study and prediction of economic trends. I don’t know how you got “Economics is untested” from “Economists have no control over economic policy”, even after a very clear and pertinent comparison with climate scientists.