Discover more from Douglass’s Newsletter
Economics is not a very good science.
Economists most like that Economics is Scientific. It has lots of numbers that can be put into Equations. What equations require a certain amount of stability across changes which can only be changes in the quantitative value of a parameter.But meanwhile important things are happening that economics tends to ignore, Things with changes that do not fit into an equationThe moral of a population living in a particular economy seems ought to be central. Who gets to be rich? How much of it is luck how much of it is family connection and how much of it is DNA? How much money is lost in mattresses and lost wallets? Each loss means less draw on some kind of guaranteed account, less claim on the existing deposits. Who really wins from these losses? Take the issue of preferences. They are supposed to characterize demand as in supply and demand. But obviously demand depends upon how much money a person has. and preferences. I’m sure you have all watched somebody, parents or friends or spouse, purchase a car. Are they rational buyers? One spouse likes the horsepower and another way out of the dashboard decision made. Not even spending five dollars for a copy of consumer reports. It seems to me that Economics, Economists, avoid the interesting big issues but still want to maintain that the economy is rationally managed And that their efforts are good Science. Compare economics to physics and biology where key problems seem front and center and compel interest. Of course if economists looked at the big questions they would stumble into things like ownership and capital, the meaning of growth and extraction, Slavery and poverty and the illusion that the rich work hard compared to the poor. It would lead to rethinking the relationship of people to the earth which is where all real economic activity comes from.
The butterfly effect across all events simultaneously Means that prediction is almost impossible.