Does the OP actually study economics? Doesn't he realise how disputed nearly everything in economics is? How little consensus there is? How complicated development economics is? And how difficult it is to successfully apply economic strategies in developing countries?Memberino
This was meant to be a thread to honor good economics and the joy it brings, like to the people of Bengladesh and elsewhere. I would have figured this thread would turn into, "wtf, he only gave money to women, that's sexist". Instead the tone is more like an economics hate thread where people are irritable about that which they do not understand.
I am not here to "debate" economics or to "debate" politics. As the subject matter is too misunderstood, at most I will try to teach some a little, but only on the margin. And it is up to the readers as to what they do with that information. Like I always say, I will teach you 2+2 =4, but the rest is up to you. Most of the time I'm sure people ignore such statements because their ego, perceptions, and general bafflement surrounding the subject gets in the way of rational intelligence. Economics is like a piece of art, which is just there. We can not change it and it does not change with the passage of time. It is not my life-long charge to show everyone where this painting is, especially when many decide to put blindfolds on first.
Economics is highly contested among everyone and is often done so with exuberant passion. The reason for this is because economics for many is not about right and wrong, but rather about money and power and exerting control over others. Those that control economic policies (public choice) and what people think are good economic policies, also control where the money is going and to whom the money is going to. This has many unseen consequences as each act sends out invisible ripples throughout the economy.
And to answer your other question, developmental economics is not complicated it is merely part of the painting. Developmental economics is more of a simpler micro process. The only thing that changes here is the businessmen around which business decisions are formed. Meaning, it has little if any political economic alterations, only economic alterations by the businessmen, which is a different matter entirely and is a much simpler subject matter. Nonetheless like all my statements I am sure you can find a fool to argue such. I am worn to it. No offense, just stating something about rational ignorance, which is in abundance now-a-days and will continue to grow.
I guess this leads me to your last whimsical question about the OP and I assume you ask this because you want to equate the message with the messenger. The reason why people ask this is because they are unable to evaluate information themselves and see the truth. Sadly the educational system and growing societal rational ignorance sterilizes people from seeing the obvious. But whatever, to answer your question most people would consider me to be an economist, though I have no such aspirations. Over my lifetime I have learned a lot and I have learned from some of the smartest people in the world. At least that's what I like to think. And I have also met two Nobel Prize winning economists, and unlike the man above they won theirs in the study of economics. But does any of this really matter to you? It doesn't to me.
Log in to comment