As the GP states, the article accepts the claim: "Economists don’t understand much about the macroeconomy" But then says that in fact economists have e.g. contributed to fewer people living in poverty. I'm simply saying…
The article presents that economic research was causal in these wins (poverty etc). There is no justification given for that in the article, it is pure dogmatic belief. Said another way, how do we know these…
As the GP states, the article accepts the claim: "Economists don’t understand much about the macroeconomy" But then says that in fact economists have e.g. contributed to fewer people living in poverty. I'm simply saying…
The article presents that economic research was causal in these wins (poverty etc). There is no justification given for that in the article, it is pure dogmatic belief. Said another way, how do we know these…