[ExI] Limits of human modification

[Dan TheBookMan]

On Nov 28, 2558 BE, at 12:42 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 11:04 PM, Chris Hibbert <cth.mydruthers at gmail.com> wrote:
>> ​> ​The reason it's called the "dismal science" is​ ​that economics can't be relied on to produce a consensus that your
>> favorite social intervention will have the consequences you want.
> 
> ​Yes, economics is far more vulnerable than other sciences to assume that if fact X about the way the universe works would lead to a more just society then fact X must be true. But nature is not interested in human justice, a fact is either true or it is not and justice be damned.
> 
> Perhaps it's just simpler to say there is a whole lot of wishful thinking is going on.  

It seems to me that Chris meant that economics tends to NOT support 'wishful thinking.' Hence the 'dismal science' epithet. It's dismal because people who want a social policy (e.g., minimum wage laws, trade restrictions, price floors and ceilings, subsidies to favored industries or groups) to overcome some problem find no encouragement from sound economic theory.

Regards,

Dan
  Sample my Kindle books via:
http://author.to/DanUst
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20151128/e2afb6d0/attachment.html>