There’s no such thing as a Nobel Prize winning economist. Economists got upset that there wasn’t a Nobel Prize for them, so came up with The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, and then pretend it’s the same thing.
If you read some of the prize winning papers some of them are also hilarious, like how economists discovered that slavery is bad fairly recently.
Damn, I should become a *Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel* prize winning economist.
There’s a reason brain rot is so popular there
It’s the Doritos, isn’t it?
I dunno. I’ve seen a lot of Doritos in well established grad labs.
…wait.
There’s nothing to rot if there is no brain tho
The percent of Americans over 18 that voted for Trump in 2016 was 25%. Yes, there’s brain rot, but it’s nowhere near what the rest of the world is picturing in their heads.
The larger issue here is voter turnout. 45% of our country refused to vote that same year. These people aren’t necessarily stupid, they just don’t give a shit. I’d call that selfishness, personally.
Ronnie Ray-gun used to say “If you’re explaining, you’re losing”. A depressing number of people seem to agree with that idea.
She’s said things that people are quoting?
The economy is not a natural phenomenon, it was designed… Economists explaining “how things work” is like someone explaining how baseball works… That’s great, but it’s time to change to an entirely different game, so you telling me how baseball works is worthless
Yes and no. While not a natural science, the study of humans making choices in a resource limited envrionment is a study that does work in examining how policy decisions affect human outcomes. The analysis should hopefully enable making better policy. Ideally we’d be less intellectually lazy than saying, “broken thing better than other broken thing”, but here we are.
Maybe it is more akin to health analysts interpeting how the rules of the game affect injuries, and then, hopefully, offer ways to reduce TBIs. The better outcome would be to not play a game that leads to concussions, but… fuck (waves hand generally)
One major problem with our current economic system is that it allows a small group of people to limit resources that would not naturally have to be limited (false scarcity). Sort of like if the rules called for throwing baseballs at people’s heads to see the effects of TBIs.
the current economy is way too complex for it to be designed, it has been shaped by people, but it’s mostly fucking emergent properties, simple interactions lead to complex shit.
I would also argue against it not being a natural phenomenon arguably any civilization that gets anywhere would have some sort of money and a system around it, a.k.a. the economy.
If you put some bacteria in a petri dish, they might even up creating a very complex system… But they’ll always be constrained by the petri dish. We can look at the petri dish and say it’s having XYZ effect, without necessarily having to get too into the weeds about the complexities of what’s happening inside the dish.
“Trump’s going to fix the economy … with tariffs!”
“Uh, a tariff is a tax.”
“…”Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
