Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would you ask "people" what a policy did instead of research what a policy did?
Because a lot of the so called research you hear about is really nothing more than 1 person's or 1 group's interpretation of something. This is why you see all kinds of political groups presenting others with "research" that "proves" their views to be correct.
Why does education matter for anything? I'll put my money on the guy who studied for 4+ years straight, and then spent a few decades working in the field.
Depends on the field. In many fields, experience is far more important than academics. In some fields, education is very important.
In this particular case, the OP is asking why it matters if the biggest supporters of supply-side economics lack education in the subject.
I think education does matter with economic theory.
Because a lot of the so called research you hear about is really nothing more than 1 person's or 1 group's interpretation of something. This is why you see all kinds of political groups presenting others with "research" that "proves" their views to be correct.
This is hysterical! The OP seems to have a spelling problem but I think his question is valid.
A Swedish high school teacher told me that he objected to the idea of making accounting mandatory in the schools on the grounds that the math would make Capitalism seem logical to the students. I was mind blown!
But I do find it curious that the right wingers don't mention the idea either.
The main strategy that does not seem to get mentioned in economics game theory is: "keep all of the pawns as ignorant as possible." Wouldn't the system still be capitalism if everyone understood accounting? There just might not be as many suckers that are easy to rip off.
1. What is a good economist and a bad economist? How does one give objectively correct answers to such a question that is not colored by personal opinion and world view?
2. When a policy is enacted in the real world 10 different people will give you 10 different points of views of what it has done. Which just proves my argument that economics are more about points of views rather then hard fact.
Let me ask you this, what is a good baseball player and a bad one? The good one bats over .300 (still "wrong" 7 out of 10 times) while the bad player bats .200 and is wrong 8 out of 10 times.
A good economist can have a personal opinion. However, they don't let politics cloud their judgement. They present the data in the most holistic way they can, even if some of the data goes against any personal bias they may have. It's not possible to get it "right" all the time, because economics is an extremely complicated subject and in the end, it's just not possible to accurately predict how every single input will affect the final result. But you can certainly still be objective. Most people who label others as liberals or conservatives have long ago lost that ability however.
Your second statement is a generalization, and a false one at that. You want to poll 10 different people who know nothing about the subject at hand, yes, you're liable to get 10 different answers. But poll 10 economists and you will get far more agreement on what the data means. The difference these days boils down to personal politics unfortunately. Understand that among economists, the ones you generally see on tv as talking heads for a political party... those are hack economists for the most part, who have an agenda to push.
Why do you liberals treat education as being at all important in something like economics???
Who would you trust your retirement investment with? (let's say you got $1,000,000 saved)
A liberal with a a Phd in Economics
or a conservative with a high school education that is a strong supporter of supply side economics?
I guarantee 99% of people would trust their retirement money to the liberal with the Phd
Supply side economics only work for the rich
it works by pushing products down people's throat... only rich people can wait 1 year to see their first earnings.
An example of that is the music industry, they play the same song over and over and over again until finally people begin to like it.
Most people have to sell what the customer wants.... I'm sure you've heard "The customer is always right"
Because most people need to make money today and can't spend a year convincing people to buy their product.
Because a lot of the so called research you hear about is really nothing more than 1 person's or 1 group's interpretation of something. This is why you see all kinds of political groups presenting others with "research" that "proves" their views to be correct.
Academic research is peer-reviewed and heavily critiqued before published. It's hardly just a single person's point of view. Research with political or financial motives is not published in academic journals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe if you are watching Faux news.
