I’m starting to believe that Economists are not scientists. They like to pretend they are, using formulas and graphs and stuff (even though they get the axes mixed up). But I really think that in the end they are just waving around saying “look at me”.
It sure seems to me like economists disagree a lot. One says that if you do one thing, then such and such will happen. Another says that if you do it, something else will happen. Well why don’t you do an experiment? Why not set a control and only alter one variable? Create a hypothesis and attempt to invalidate it. Is this so hard? That’s how real scientists work. Economists like to espouse things, and then explain retroactively why something might have happened, but you can’t be sure because there are really so many factors involved. What? That’s not science.
Now I realize that real scientists have their disagreements also. But there is a system in place to resolve these called the scientific method. If you think that evolution is a crackpot idea, well then go out and prove it. Come up with some experiment that proves what you think, and you’ll be famous. You don’t think relativity is anything but hogwash? Knock yourself out. There is a codified system for proving and disproving these things.
So until someone is able to show me how, exactly, economics is a science and not an art, I will continue to think that most of them are full of it, and also, very pompous about being full of it.