Yes, lounging in an air-conditioned room, an economist breaks your shoulders with the help of government and sells you a statistical book on “unemployment, money and interest rates”. If you’re uncommon, you are unlikely to buy it. If you’re common, you would unconditionally hail this astrologer. This sesquipedalianist can “astrologically” anticipate, expect, project and speculate GDP numbers and prices using mathematical models, and would end up doing more egonomics than economics [in the name of ergonomics]. I pity these self-claimed intellectual socio scientists who are likely to pour out pseudo-scientific solutions for a “mainstream problem” using the obsolete consciousness. Their policy views doesn’t only expropriate us, but also strengthens the given stultification. That is where I believe that they have vehemently made economics to sound as rocket science.
[dropcap]I[/dropcap] am not disliking this subject called “economics”, but there isn’t any requirement of “macro” factor in this subject when it can be commonly understood that market is a destination for voluntaryists who are willing to tranquilly trade with each other using zero force. Currently, in order to implement their theories, economists are unlikely to suggest good ideas because their ideology requires a force called government. This influences me to perorate that economists are legal terrorists who “want” human action to solely function upon objective grounds than on catallactic basis. And, then, there are some economists who believe that homo economicus is just silly. I wonder whether their statement wasn’t backed by rational interests.
“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” – Murray N. Rothbard
Yes, nothing can be perfect, except econometric models. Read my piece: Irrelevance of stats and maths in economics. You know, economaths can simply quantify qualities and land you at IMF or WB or banks. Ignorance is a bliss, even for these “parasitical” econ professors!
Benevolently note that I am not propagating or promoting any school of economics. My argument is critically based on logic. I am not responsible for how statists and their “godly” economists decipher my article. I surely know that your nearby economist brutally suffers from apoplithorismosphobia and you’re unaware of it. S/he will scorn you, when you propose my premise with them. Thanks to myself for not joining their wing and intimidating your life for endeavoring to do any praxeology. Lot many students, at my institute, where I teach, abhor economics because they find it weird and technical. I do my level best by emphasizing on micro units than macroeconomics and econometrics, albeit my seniors hate me for critically “brainwashing” my students. Economics is axiomatically and intrinsically organic, and it is mechanically not something that one can simply do to master in college. Unsure when economists are gonna think beyond the pretense of knowledge.
