pull down to refresh

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 5h \ parent \ on: What a New Math Breakthrough Means for Economics econ
Most economists understand that too. It's worth keeping in mind though, that just because a conclusion isn't mathematically certain doesn't mean mean it's wrong either.
Then the question is: Why do they keep on using metrics, measurements and theories that discount this reasoning and, thus, making policy recommendations that are not working? Why would they do that, other than to support their paymasters, the clowns of the state? This is my problem with mathematical, empirical economics.
write
preview
30 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 5h
It’s a very good question and I don’t know the answer. I always found it hard to square.
My sense is that they just don’t know how else to approach these questions that have so much interest, so they do something they know is wrong and hope they find something that’s at least useful.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic OP 5h
It’s a very good question and I don’t know the answer. I always found it hard to square.
Try this one on for size: they keep using them because those are the answers the paymaster/clowns are looking for! Like everyone else, the people making the economic analyses and prognostications wants to make a healthy, comfortable living! The best way to do that is to please your masters, isn’t it?
reply