No need to convince me of Econ 101 BS, economists themselves are well aware of it since at least the 1980s. That’s why basically every unit of Econ above the 101 level shits on it, and any good Econ 101 shits on itself.
As a general rule of thumb, anything in economics before 1970 basically ran on vibes due to lack of data. Unfortunately, current day undergrad Econ 101 lags at least 20 years behind the current consensus.
That’s why the Card, Angrist, and Imbens paper was such a big deal. They used (natural) experimental data, and found out that using Econ 101 supply and demand to study the labour market doesn’t work. That’s why there’s an entire field called labour economics, which is only taught at the graduate level.
Most policymakers probably only learnt Econ 101 maybe 4 decades ago, so they’re impression of Econ is probably six decades out of date.
Funnily enough labour economics was taught as an elective at my undergrad in my european uni. This whole post makes me mad considering the amount of work it was getting through that bachelor’s, and especially so when you consider they literally had data science integrated as one of the optional minors… Which I took.
These people don’t have the slightest clue about economics beyond what they’re taught they manage to learn in highschool, and therefore forecast that pitiful amount of knowledge to an entire empirical field… Probably to make themselves feel better. Human discount model in motion.
No need to convince me of Econ 101 BS, economists themselves are well aware of it since at least the 1980s. That’s why basically every unit of Econ above the 101 level shits on it, and any good Econ 101 shits on itself.
As a general rule of thumb, anything in economics before 1970 basically ran on vibes due to lack of data. Unfortunately, current day undergrad Econ 101 lags at least 20 years behind the current consensus.
That’s why the Card, Angrist, and Imbens paper was such a big deal. They used (natural) experimental data, and found out that using Econ 101 supply and demand to study the labour market doesn’t work. That’s why there’s an entire field called labour economics, which is only taught at the graduate level.
Most policymakers probably only learnt Econ 101 maybe 4 decades ago, so they’re impression of Econ is probably six decades out of date.
The Death of “Econ 101” - https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/10/the-death-of-econ-101
Funnily enough labour economics was taught as an elective at my undergrad in my european uni. This whole post makes me mad considering the amount of work it was getting through that bachelor’s, and especially so when you consider they literally had data science integrated as one of the optional minors… Which I took.
These people don’t have the slightest clue about economics beyond what
they’re taughtthey manage to learn in highschool, and therefore forecast that pitiful amount of knowledge to an entire empirical field… Probably to make themselves feel better. Human discount model in motion.