(Replying to PARENT post)

Economics has an honesty problem. Financially motivated obfuscation is a problem in other sciences: global warming denialism, sponsored studies claiming that cigarettes aren't carcinogenic, all manner of food health and safety claims, and so on. Generally the evidence is overwhelmingly against them and the battle is mostly over PR and communicating to the public.

Economics is different; arguments that are very convenient to people who are wealthy under the status quo are very difficult to challenge, resulting in failed austerity programmes, "trickle down", and so on.

๐Ÿ‘คpjc50๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

I partially agree with this view; however, to be fair, this is not a problem with academic economics, but rather with "pop economics".

There is no lack of academic economists who can (and do) prove how austerity programs and trickle-down are wrong; in fact, they're the only ones really leading the charge on this matter in the political world at the moment.

The problem is that policy leaders not trained in advanced economic studies (most of them lawyers by trade, as you would expect in the business of writing laws) are awash in "pop economics", cheap literature peddled by suspect gurus sponsored by interested parties. This creates a hegemonic but distorted view of the field that is then very hard to shake.

๐Ÿ‘คtoyg๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Most austerity program fail because there is no true austerity. Outside of Greece which has had to make real cuts simply because it hasn't the money the vast majority of countries which claimed some form of austerity never actually cut spending, some kept increasing it.

In the US it is all a shell game where the deceit of baseline budgeting allows Congress and the President to claim cuts when spending increases. The US could balance its budget in a manner of years if budgeting were honest and they actually reduce spending increases below inflation.

๐Ÿ‘คShivetya๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Plenty of economists argue against things like austerity, trickle-down, etc...

The problem is that politicians aren't interested in implementing the most ideal economic policies, they're interested in policies that give the effect they want - which is often at odds with the common good.

๐Ÿ‘คMikeb85๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

To summarize, "I represent truth in the service of mankind. Those with whom I disagree if not stupid, must be acting out of the most base self-interest."
๐Ÿ‘คJackFr๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

> trickle down

I was just reading the convention speech of the Democratic candidate for president in 1896, William Jennings Bryan. In his speech ( http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5354/ ) he says "There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it." So some Democrats had to counter this trickle down nonsense even back then.

As an aside, in the speech he says "we shall fight them to the uttermost, having behind us the producing masses of the nation and the world". Can you imagine a Democratic presidental nominee saying that today, even if by some miracle it was Bernie Sanders? It's impossible - the heirs, and rentiers, and LPs and VCs and "job creators" and other parasites on those of us who work and create wealth have gained too much control of the system. And for the past two weeks signs are around that it could be entering one of its periodic crackups.

๐Ÿ‘คobrero๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

It is safe to say, that the economic theory a person subscribes to is highly related to their income.

Unless, of course, you're a politician, in which case it is related to vote count.

๐Ÿ‘คjevgeni๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0

(Replying to PARENT post)

Careful, I think your politics is showing.
๐Ÿ‘คgadders๐Ÿ•‘10y๐Ÿ”ผ0๐Ÿ—จ๏ธ0