Is Economics A Science?

[joepistole]

How many Economists called the GREATEST economic catastrophe of a generation? Only a couple. All the rest (literally MILLIONS of graduated economists) who had crawled up into their collective economic anuses warmed by their occasional Nobel Prize (next to WarHawk Obama and his Nobel Peace prize [Ha!]) safe in the knowledge economics was a "Science" completely MISSED it.

Prove me wrong Joe. Use your economic "Theory" to tell me what the price of oil, silver and gold will be December next year. What about the US dollar, is it going to collapse as BillyT says or be stronger than ever. How about Japan. How much longer will they be in a recession. Will the Euro still be around. Please calculate your "results" to the 0.05 alpha value and include the error as error of the mean as that's easiest.

See, unlike a real science, which can make predictions with a certain statistical certainty, economics can't. As a matter of fact, you have absolutely ZERO reliable evidence of ANY major economic events. Some "Science" economics is. If it can't make ANY useful predictions then it can't answer ANY of it's own hypothesis reliably and is in no way different from Phrenology (ready bumps on the skull to determine aptitude).

These FACTS have nothing at all to do with my political leanings. They are, as it where, what they are.

I think this plus your many other posts on this matter demonstrate your profound aversion to the truth here Michael. Discourse with you is like talking to a religious fundamentalist. You consistently avoid the issue; repeat the same old illogical arguments, declarations and questions and ignore evidence and reason in favor of your dearly held biases which are not supported by fact, evidence or reason and in fact run counter to all the above.

 

[Michael]

I think this plus your many other posts on this matter demonstrate your profound aversion to the truth here Michael. Discourse with you is like talking to a religious fundamentalist. You consistently avoid the issue; repeat the same old illogical arguments, declarations and questions and ignore evidence and reason in favor of your dearly held biases which are not supported by fact, evidence or reason and in fact run counter to all the above.

IOWs, no, you can not make ANY useful predictions using "Economic Theory". So, I guess when push comes to shove, economics isn't much of a science is it? ZERO predictability would mean ZERO scientific credibility.

Think of it like this, what if Evolution Theory or Electromagnetic Theory could not make a single reasonable prediction? Would you still consider these fields of study "Scientific"? No, you would not. Much like the Theory of Phrenology did, they'd go defunct. What makes them "Scientific" is that they are able to make scientific predictions with very accurate results. They are amiable to the Scientific Experimentation.

Why do you think Economics should get a pass? It shouldn't. If it can't make any reasonable predictions about it's field of study (the economy), then it's not Scientific. It's no different than Astronomy. Even Astronomers make predictions about the Economy based on Empirical data gathered about the state of the stars. So what? They're not scientific either.

So, not only is Economics NOT amiable to the Scientific Method, it doesn't make any useful predictions. Why in the world would anyone consider this field Scientific? The only reason I can think of is because they're an Economist and they want to pretend their field is Scientific and they're somehow a "Scientist". Anyone forming an objective opinion would say it's not Science.

 

[Michael]

http://post.nyssa.org/nyssa-news/2011/07/astrology-and-economic-forecasts.html?cid=6a0120a8cdef2c970b014e8a162dd0970d

When making forecasts economists tend to favor consensual thinking, which allows slight deviations from the established average. It is, however, very unusual to make forecasts based on methods that are far removed from a series of parameters, given that it is easier to explain a mistake due to consensual thinking than a mistake based on a completely out of consensus prediction. For example, before 2007 the IMF extolled the merits of the “originate and distribute” credit model, which is the cause of numerous current problems. It praised the solidity of the Icelandic banking system, and in the summer of 2008 stated that “The worst of the crisis had passed.” Moreover, a brilliant UBS economist (George Magnus) correctly predicted in March 2007 the financial meltdown (or Minsky moment, as it is known, named after economist Hyman Minsky who warned of the dangers of speculation by financial institutions), while other UBS economists stated in May 2007 that “The risk of global recession was 0%,” (a statement that if I’m honest I have to admit I would have agreed with at the time) and the bank itself was accumulating structured products on its balance sheet.

Seems VERY biased to me. Where's the so called scientific objectivity? It's simply not there.

Financial astrology

Financial astrology is sometimes applied in the following ways:

1. Predicting major economic trends as they relate to certain cycles, specifically on the cycles of outer planets
2. Helping an investor find the best industry to be in for a particular period of time based on major planetary configurations
3. Identifying the best stocks to own during a particular time period
4. Identifying the best date and time to buy or sell a stock
5. Correlating the Astrological aspect to the movement of stock market in day trading.

 

[Michael]

I wanted to see if I could best Joe in a game of: Who's the better Economist ME or Joe. I thought what I'd do is pull out an ancient Chinese Astrological Map, study it, and then make a prediction for 2012.

1. More inflation for USA, economy remains in recession, banks get more QE.
2. Gold up to 2500, silver hits 60, oil over 110.
3. Euro is saved with their very own qualitative easing/money printing.
4. USA gears for war (ooooo gotta love that sweet sweet inflation)
5. Paul wins the GOP nomination.
6. More stagflation for Japan.
7. China's economy slows.

 

[joepistole]

IOWs, no, you can not make ANY useful predictions using "Economic Theory". So, I guess when push comes to shove, economics isn't much of a science is it? ZERO predictability would mean ZERO scientific credibility.

Oh, I will agree that you cannot make useful economic predictions. However, corporations don't pay millions of dollars every year for useless economic predictions. After all free market competition does not favor waste and inefficiency.

Bottom line here Michael is your subject matter ignorance is showing.

Think of it like this, what if Evolution Theory or Electromagnetic Theory could not make a single reasonable prediction? Would you still consider these fields of study "Scientific"? No, you would not. Much like the Theory of Phrenology did, they'd go defunct. What makes them "Scientific" is that they are able to make scientific predictions with very accurate results. They are amiable to the Scientific Experimentation.

Why do you think Economics should get a pass? It shouldn't. If it can't make any reasonable predictions about it's field of study (the economy), then it's not Scientific. It's no different than Astronomy. Even Astronomers make predictions about the Economy based on Empirical data gathered about the state of the stars. So what? They're not scientific either.

So, not only is Economics NOT amiable to the Scientific Method, it doesn't make any useful predictions. Why in the world would anyone consider this field Scientific? The only reason I can think of is because they're an Economist and they want to pretend their field is Scientific and they're somehow a "Scientist". Anyone forming an objective opinion would say it's not Science.

More nonsense that runs counter to the evidence and reason.

 

[Michael]

So, your predictions were what for 2012??? Come on Joe, put that $100000 degree to the test. You versus me, mono-un-mono. Ouija board versus "Economic" theory

 

[joepistole]

so, you're predictions were what for 2012??? Come on joe, put that $100000 degree to the test. You versus me, mono-un-mono. Ouija board versus "economic" theory :d

lol

 

[hansda]

EXTRACT OF MY "THEORY OF MONEY-FLOW" IS AS FOLLOWS :



Current flows, heat flows, air flows, water flows, money flows. There are well defined theories for current flow, heat flow, air flow and water flow. What is the similar theory for money flow ?

In my attempt to search for theory of money flow, I have developed two theories, which can define money flow.

Money is inert and can not move on its own. Money needs external force for its movement. The external force, which causes money flow, is imparted by human being. Human beings are guided by their mind for every action. A force applied by a human being is controlled by his mind. So money flow basically is physical movement of money with the control of minds of human beings. To define money flow, its physical movement is to be defined and also the psychological logic, controlling the minds of human beings for this physical movement of money, is to be defined. My first theory defines the physical movement of money and the second theory defines the psychological logic controlling the minds of human beings for the physical movement of money.

According to my understanding, the two theories for money flow are as follows:

First Theory of Money Flow : “ Money moves from pocket to pocket and money remains in this flow.”

Second Theory of Money Flow : “ Money runs after gold, the effective or equivalent golden value of the things and the real gold is GOD.”

 

[Michael]

hansda, it was that Chinese astrological chart wasn't it? TOTAL inspiration.....

EXTRACT OF MY "THEORY OF MONEY-FLOW" IS AS FOLLOWS :

current flows, heat flows, air flows, water flows, money flows. There are well defined theories for current flow, heat flow, air flow and water flow. What is the similar theory for money flow ?

In my attempt to search for theory of money flow, I have developed two theories, which can define money flow.

Money is inert and can not move on its own. Money needs external force for its movement. The external force, which causes money flow, is imparted by human being. Human beings are guided by their mind for every action. A force applied by a human being is controlled by his mind. So money flow basically is physical movement of money with the control of minds of human beings. To define money flow, its physical movement is to be defined and also the psychological logic, controlling the minds of human beings for this physical movement of money, is to be defined. My first theory defines the physical movement of money and the second theory defines the psychological logic controlling the minds of human beings for the physical movement of money.

According to my understanding, the two theories for money flow are as follows:

First Theory of Money Flow : “ Money moves from pocket to pocket and money remains in this flow.”

Second Theory of Money Flow : “ Money runs after gold, the effective or equivalent golden value of the things and the real gold is GOD.”

OK, firstly, I had to shrink the font down to a readable size.

Now, here's my first question: What is 'money'?
Second question, you lost me with that last term 'GOD'? What is that? Is it Gold Opposes Dissolution?


If I were Joe, I'd pay particular close attention as he might learn a thing or three on what is and what is not deductive reasoning Don't take this the wrong way, but your theory seems remarkable close to Paul Krugman's Fake Alien Invasion Would End Economic Slump Theory. And he won a 'Nobel Prize' I'm serious, he won a God** damn Nobel Prize in economics! They give those things out for all sorts of bull... errrr Economic Theories.....


**Here's God refers to the Mount God Minato wa ga found in the river that runs through Kobe Japan.

 

[Michael]

PS: Joe, I'm checking my 'predictions' this time next year

 

[joepistole]

PS: Joe, I'm checking my 'predictions' this time next year

Good, what are they?

 

[Michael]

Didn't you see the bottom of the Chinese astrological chart?

It took me all day (or at least a beer) to painstakingly translate 2000 year old Chinese mysticism into modern Economic Theory!!

1. More inflation for USA, economy remains in recession, banks get more QE.
2. Gold up to 2500, silver hits 60, oil over 110.
3. Euro is saved with their very own qualitative easing/money printing.
4. USA gears for war (ooooo gotta love that sweet sweet inflation)
5. Paul wins the GOP nomination.
6. More stagflation for Japan.
7. China's economy slows.

 

[hansda]

OK, firstly, I had to shrink the font down to a readable size.

I thought this font-size will be useful .

Now, here's my first question: What is 'money'?

Money is already defined in economics . It is with which accounts can be made . This theory mostly deals with physics part of money .

Second question, you lost me with that last term 'GOD'? What is that?

Here GOD with the perspective of economy refers to total-economy .

Is it Gold Opposes Dissolution?

Here I used the term Gold to explain psychological aspect of money .

If I were Joe, I'd pay particular close attention as he might learn a thing or three on what is and what is not deductive reasoning Don't take this the wrong way, but your theory seems remarkable close to Paul Krugman's Fake Alien Invasion Would End Economic Slump Theory. And he won a 'Nobel Prize'

 

[joepistole]

Didn't you see the bottom of the Chinese astrological chart?

It took me all day (or at least a beer) to painstakingly translate 2000 year old Chinese mysticism into modern Economic Theory!!

1. More inflation for USA, economy remains in recession, banks get more QE.
2. Gold up to 2500, silver hits 60, oil over 110.
3. Euro is saved with their very own qualitative easing/money printing.
4. USA gears for war (ooooo gotta love that sweet sweet inflation)
5. Paul wins the GOP nomination.
6. More stagflation for Japan.
7. China's economy slows.

Well your #1 is already wrong as the US economy is not in recession. The US has been out of recession since June 2009.

http://www.nber.org/cycles.html

Two there is nothing wrong with a little inflation. In fact it is a good thing. So let's get more specific, what will the US inflation rate be for 2012?

 

[Michael]

Well your #1 is already wrong as the US economy is not in recession. The US has been out of recession since June 2009.

http://www.nber.org/cycles.html

Two there is nothing wrong with a little inflation. In fact it is a good thing. So let's get more specific, what will the US inflation rate be for 2012?

IMO, pumping money into the economy does nothing to change the real structural defects that have built up over the last 8 decades of governmental direct crony capitalism. They remain. The only reason we're not in deeper shit is because the "Communist" Chinese have been working their asses off for free.

Lucky us. Don't expect it to last much longer.

IMO we're in a Depression. As much you must admire your hero George Bush Jr for "saving" the nation with his massive bailouts - is as much as I am sure it'll lead to a long term depression. Just ask the Japanese. Now, imagine a depression with inflation. You can thank your lovely central reserve crony bank for that.

The central bank is supposedly "impartial". Yeah, what a croak of shit. Obama promised the Europeans we'd be there to bail them out "standing together". Well, how in hell can Obama make that promise? He can not by law have any sway over the Central Bank which is supposedly completely free of all political interference (only an idiot would believe that bullshit).

But, in this day and age, oxymoron abound don't they. Out of one side of Obama's mouth we've won the War on Terror. The troupes are coming home. Out of the other side of his mouth he's just signed away our rights.


Military given go-ahead to detain US Citizen suspects without trial INSIDE America


(Honestly Joe, it shocks me you'd support Obama following that little act. You are no Liberal that's for damn sure. But, then again, either is Obama).

As for my Chinese Astrological guess as to what inflation will be? It's a complete guess. No one can know what it will be. Which is the whole point. I'll pick it at between 8-15% for 2012.

 

[Michael]

Money is already defined in economics . It is with which accounts can be made . This theory mostly deals with physics part of money .



Here GOD with the perspective of economy refers to total-economy .



Here I used the term Gold to explain psychological aspect of money .

I don't understand all three of these sentences. I'm not sure what Money is because I'm sure more than just accounts can be made with it. I'm atheist and so have no idea what a God is doing in the mix and I am sure gold is more than just psychological because I've seen the amount of work (energy and time) it takes to get a single gram of it!

 

[joepistole]

IMO, pumping money into the economy does nothing to change the real structural defects that have built up over the last 8 decades of governmental direct crony capitalism. They remain. The only reason we're not in deeper shit is because the "Communist" Chinese have been working their asses off for free.

Lucky us. Don't expect it to last much longer.

Last 80 years? Things have been pretty good for the United States these last 80 years. We have become the world's only super power. We are the richest country in the world. Those are not bad things. I agree we have a problem with crony capitalism. It is a serious chronic problem that has reached a critical stage.

As for China, I think you are giving them too much credit.

IMO we're in a Depression. As much you must admire your hero George Bush Jr for "saving" the nation with his massive bailouts - is as much as I am sure it'll lead to a long term depression. Just ask the Japanese. Now, imagine a depression with inflation. You can thank your lovely central reserve crony bank for that.

Well that is your opinion, but as with most of your opinions, it is not supported with evidence and reason. The fact remains we have been out of recession since June of 2009. And the economy has been growing at steady but modest pace since Jan 2010.

And as for your statements about Bush Junior, that is an outright lie. Two you cannot have depression and inflation at the same time. They are two very opposite things. The only thing that will bring about a long and enduring depression, is to do what you and Paul are advocating.

The central bank is supposedly "impartial". Yeah, what a croak of shit. Obama promised the Europeans we'd be there to bail them out "standing together". Well, how in hell can Obama make that promise? He can not by law have any sway over the Central Bank which is supposedly completely free of all political interference (only an idiot would believe that bullshit).

Oh, just where did Obama promise to bail out the Europeans? Bottom line, he never made such a statement/promise. That is you making stuff up again.

But, in this day and age, oxymoron abound don't they. Out of one side of Obama's mouth we've won the War on Terror. The troupes are coming home. Out of the other side of his mouth he's just signed away our rights.


Military given go-ahead to detain US Citizen suspects without trial INSIDE America

You are making stuff up again. President Obama never said we have won the war on terror. However, he is bringing the troops home from Iraq - complying with a treaty signed by the George Junior administration.

(Honestly Joe, it shocks me you'd support Obama following that little act. You are no Liberal that's for damn sure. But, then again, either is Obama).

As for my Chinese Astrological guess as to what inflation will be? It's a complete guess. No one can know what it will be. Which is the whole point. I'll pick it at between 8-15% for 2012.

You are correct, I am not a liberal nor is Obama. And I would be less likely to support Obama if he did the things you have accused him of doing. But here is the rub, he has not done the things that you have accused him of doing.

I think next year your inflation estimate is going to be way off.

 

[Michael]

I put my "Economic" prediction at 8-15%.

And you Joe?


By the way, the Fed IS as we speak bailing out the Euro-trash banks. Only if Paul's is elected to office, will the Feds books be completely opened. The Fed pumped in 13 TRILLION, of course you'd see some change in GDP.

As for inflationary Depression, never say never. It'll be the idiotic incompetence of morons like Ben Bernanke that is going to put us into a deeper Depression than we're already in. As they say, give a man enough rope....

 

[joepistole]

I put my "Economic" prediction at 8-15%.

And you Joe?

My estimate is 2.5 to 3.5 percent.

By the way, the Fed IS as we speak bailing out the Euro-trash banks. Only if Paul's is elected to office, will the Feds books be completely opened. The Fed pumped in 13 TRILLION, of course you'd see some change in GDP.

No the Fed is not bailing out the "Euro-Trash Banks". What the Fed has done is exchanged dollars for Euros at the market exchange rate under a swap agreement with the European central bank.

Two, the Federal Reserve has not pumped in anywhere near 13 trillion dollars. The entire money supply is no where near 13 trillion dollars. And the money supply has remained tame and under control. The narrow measure of US money supply (m1) is a little over 2 trillion dollars. That is hardly Weimar Republic style inflation. And just as easily as the Fed can expand money supply, it can shrink the money supply just as quickly.

As for inflationary Depression, never say never. It'll be the idiotic incompetence of morons like Ben Bernanke that is going to put us into a deeper Depression than we're already in. As they say, give a man enough rope....

It's like being a little bit pregnant. You cannot be pregnant and not pregnant at the same time.

Two, we are not in a depression. As previous stated, the economy has been growing at a constant but modest rate (2-3 percent) since 2010.

 

[hansda]

Money is already defined in economics . It is with which accounts can be made . This theory mostly deals with physics part of money .

Here GOD with the perspective of economy refers to total-economy .

Here I used the term Gold to explain psychological aspect of money .

I don't understand all three of these sentences. I'm not sure what Money is because I'm sure more than just accounts can be made with it. I'm atheist and so have no idea what a God is doing in the mix and I am sure gold is more than just psychological because I've seen the amount of work (energy and time) it takes to get a single gram of it!

Here money stands for coins and banknotes . Economic definition of money as per Wikipedia is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money .


Here I used the term GOD to refer to the total economy , which can be considered as one-pocket , where all the money of the economy is placed .

Gold has a quality which attracts mind . Physical movement of money is controlled by our mind . So , gold attracts money through our mind . We carry money in our pocket to buy gold . We also carry money in our pocket to buy other things , which are not exactly gold . So , an equivalence can be found between gold and other things in terms of money .