• hakase@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Trying to model the behaviour of a single human is an incredibly difficult task. Trying to model the behaviour of billions is harder. Then you need to blend in their relationships to eachother. Then you need to blend in their relationships with their means of sustainance. With their individual values. Etc etc etc.

    Trying to model the behavior of a single eddy of wind is an incredibly difficult task. Trying to model the behavior of billions is harder. Then you need to blend in their relationships to eachother. Then you need to blend in their relationships with the causes of those individual eddies. With their individual values. Etc etc etc.

    If it’s the case that it’s just a matter of reading your econ textbook and then you can accurately model the economy, or even a small part of it […]

    It’s not the case. My entire comment was about why that’s not the case at all. Extracting disproportionate wealth is hard for the same reasons weather forecasting is hard. Not because of the theory, but because of the complexity of the system the theory describes.

    I’m not saying that the theory is bad, but it’s a masterbutory exercise. Applying the theory results is such disparate actual outcomes make it more like legend then law.

    You still haven’t shown how this is any different to applying the theory of weather forecasting, or applying the theory of plate tectonics and still failing to predict earthquakes, etc.

    However, I personally think that the frequent rejection of that reality serves a different psychological purpose, which is the need to translate wealth distribution to an explainable system… Specifically one that explains favourably to people who already have the wealth.

    You’re conflating the science of economics with the meta-discussion surrounding the politics of economics.

    This is just like someone arguing that weather science is bullshit because we can’t successfully predict the weather, and it therefore only exists as an excuse to implement more damn liberal environmental policies.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You still haven’t shown how this is any different to applying the theory of weather forecasting, or applying the theory of plate tectonics and still failing to predict earthquakes, etc

      Well the sentience and self-determination of the agents involve, in my mind, make the constituent agents significantly more difficult to predict in the case of the economy than predicting the weather.

      Do… You disagree? Maybe I’m missing something, I probably am, I’m not a smart man… But it appears that you’re appealing broadly towards some echo of “rational market theory” and I don’t really understand how people do that in the age of Elon Musk. Many major factors in how the economy works are governed by passionate and irrational agents.

      The air, and pressure systems, while complex, aren’t rational or irrational. They don’t have childhood trauma, fear, mortality… Greed, desire of any kind.

      So, you’re right, I suppose I can’t show that humans are more difficult to predict the behaviours than air. It seems obvious to me, but I can and will freely admit the difference between what I know, and what I think I know.

      I guess, from my undeducated and naive perspective, economics is primarily applied sociology with some pretty rudimentary math sprinkled in… And so I would assume that it would inherit the same issues as sociology (being that it’s actually pretty hard to develop models to describe how groups of people behave).

      I don’t mean to strike a nerve. I took like 2 econ courses like 15 years ago… so I admit I have a super elementary understanding of what the study entails. I’m just a guy on the internet with not a very valuable opinion on the subject, coloured primarily by what, in my opinion, the study of economics has failed to do or achieve, rather than having an in depth understanding of what the study is.

    • schroedingershat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If weather prediction were based on the idea that eddies were produced by gnomes with wooden spoons, you’d have an argument.