Economics is a faith-based sham with an overlay of mathematics to give it substance. It should only be taught along with other bogus fields in schools of theology.
this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
406 points (95.1% liked)
Political Memes
8104 readers
1971 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
If I hear one more "Economist say" or "Economics warn"
Y'all still owe me 2008 and after. And every outlet repeat what those "economist" say just put gas on the fire and accelerate what they "predict".
Apart from a cluster at the top I see a bit of a curve. Not much.
Economics and psychology will always be inherently fuzzy because of the whole free will thing.
Hmm sounds like a grad student really trying to make their data say something so they can graduate and finally start the life long process of paying back student loans.
Inflation isn't just a function of unemployment. Unemployment isn't just a function of inflation.
It could be that with all else held constant, plotting the two against each other would give a similar curve to the left. Or it could be that the curve on the left was presented as an oversimplification of the big picture to manipulate policy or political will.
From my pov, the ratio of money supply minus savings to goods/services supply is the biggest factor for inflation, though there's a time lag and prices are sticky downward.
Focusing on money supply misses the most significant factor in inflation, missed by all armchair economists- the private banking system.
A $1 million asset is not part of the money supply, if it's value increases to $2 million it has no impact on inflation.
If the owner of that asset then aquires a loan against that asset and spends that money, they have increased the money in circulation. That is a far more significant driver of inflation than government spending. Meanwhile the FED (or equivalent) has not printed one additional dollar.
These models don't work because they ignore the MOST significant driver of inflation
What's the loan money in your example if it's not an increase of the money supply?
Or a reduction in savings.
Edit: though it is more complex than that because the banks can reloan the money as others put it into their savings.
These models don't work because they ignore the MOST significant driver of inflation
Wellll... they work just fine for their intended purpose - demonstrate the correlation between 2 variables in an understandable way.
What you are (correctly) referencing is that there is a much more complex system in reality than the simplified model - they literally exist to try and explain difficult concepts in digestible ways. Everyone's eyes glaze over if you try to do the "if this, then that, but if this then the other (at 45 variables level).
So yes, inflation is wildly more complex than just money supply or demand push inflation (the flavour the Phillips curve is looking at).
But the people in this thread bitching about economists dumbing stuff down so they can understand it resulting in simplistic models that don't reflect the real world would be just as quick to bitch about how they're in an ivory tower because they refuse to explain things in laymans terms.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I agree economics is not a science. But using a line chart is just dishonest and so is cropping data so that it shows only a stagflation period. There is a reason it has a special name.
it’s not a technically perfect 4chan post ill give you that. i agree with the sentiment though, given other experiences i have listed in these comments :)
I don't know the answer to this question: have we been in stagflation for the last 50 years? Because cropping data points is a great way to distort the picture, but I counted somewhere over 40 points before I lost the point.
Not quite, stagflation requires both high inflation and unemployment which we did see concurrently during COVID.
But it also needs low or negative economic growth which again we did see during COVID but growth and employment have been up so we haven't had a long period of stagflation.
The final key thing that I don't think is technically required is that the fed can't lower rates to drive growth because inflation is too high hence the economy gets stuck. It feels like this could be where we are heading but haven't quite been in a prolonged enough period to qualify for yet.
The graph on the right looks like if the ancient Greeks discovered a constellation of a protogen wearing a bowtie.
it’s my brain rewiring after drinking a double aspartame celcius
Anti-intellectualism on Lemmy, it must be a day ending in y.
Calling well-earned criticism of economics anti-intellectualism is using the composition/division fallacy.
Most people's lives have been affected for decades by Chicago School of Economics voodoo nonsense, that's where much modern criticism is aimed.
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_in_a_Time_of_Debt
• https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/jul/11/how-economics-became-a-religion
And Jesus fucking Christ, the number of people in here who speak like economics is a field united behind Austrian economics is fucking bizarre.
view more: next ›