What’s with your obsession with France? Why don’t you focus on your own country and how much it fucking sucks since you’re from there?

That’s no orc that’s a fucking goblin. Orcs are massive. You’re on some delusional shit if you believe otherwise and that there are no species defining traits.

If you’d stopped at telling others what you’re doing. But no, you must feel righteous in criticising their choices of device, why they use it, and how much they spend on them.

People don’t owe you explanations for any of that.

I didn’t say degrading, that wouldn’t even work grammatically. I said denigrating, “to criticise unfairly, disparage”.

Learn something. And stop putting other people’s ideas down.

Why do you enjoy denigrating people’s choices? You’re not the only one capable of rationality. It might make total sense from their perspective and financial situation.

I look like the 40 in my 20s.

Gotta agree with that.

deleted by creator

The “economy” will exist whether it’s a capitalist system or something else. Blaming the system is a stupid take when it’s the actors within it causing the issues you complain about.

It’s like blaming gravity.

To be fair, people call chess a sport, and then there’s e-sports. Neither fit with the definition of physical exertion.

Replace “master”, which is creepy and subservient, with “friend”.

Too soon…

This is what you claim to have done: “a joke about how bad the state of the academy is in promoting neoliberal economics”

And this is what you actually said: “Economics is not real bro”

I shouldn’t need to spell it out any further than that.

Learning from mistakes is an improvement. That you’re mad about it doesn’t make it any less true. And clearly you don’t know what straw-men are given I’ve quoted you in my reply.

We could just skip a few steps down the list and agree it all just comes down to maths.

You could literally apply this nonsensical logic to any other field that uses maths and say “it’s mathematics, not X”. This is a non-argument.

“Policy Making is Politics”, politicians implement policies, but the ones behind the scenes who actually do the math to optimise these policies and advise politicians are economists.

“Conclusion-Driven” this is just plain false. There is an overwhelming amount of empiricism in the economics field.

“Economists have predicted 8 of the last 2 Recessions” … and have learned from these mistakes. These were described and studied in detail in my course, and you then go on to say that macroeconomics do not seem to be falsifiable. Yes there are no ways to ethically have experiments in economics, but there are plenty of workarounds to not being able to experiment. Natural experiments are rare but they do exist, as well as a myriad of other data science methods to derive conclusions from real life scenarios.

Finally, “when I worked in Finance”. Finance is a single field of economics, it does not encompass all there is to learn from economics. There is also a conflation from those who study finance courses that what is taught in economics courses is similar. It isn’t. Economics is a STEM field, while finance is a business field.

Which is why it’s explained in economic courses beyond your baseless ideas that there are better models to calculate standards of living than GDP. But you’d never know that. Because you know nothing of economics.

You’re confusing the study of economics with specific economic ideologies. Clearly you’ve never studied the subject and are very much biased.

Economics gathers and interprets data like any other STEM field, don’t know what else to tell you. The stuff I learned in my degree is very much real.

Econometrics, data science, behavioural economics, game theory, micro and macroeconomics, public policy, all of it uses the scientific method and is empirical.

Could you clarify which part of economics you believe is not scientific?