Economists are fucking sociopaths

Just read a newspaper column by a neoliberal economist who compared Italy to a spoiled child asking for candy, because they wanted good social services and early retirement. I know that M5S isn't exactly the most "radical" leftist cred party, but they are much more committed to actually improving living conditions than the spineless socdems who have been in charge for the last few years.

Why does the economist consider M5S so radical? Because these new plans might scare off investors, who would then be unwilling to buy up Italy's national debt. What the absolute fuck? Why should a sovereign country even be dependent on outside investors at all?

If unelected investors can decide what governments are and aren't acceptable for democratic countries, why even have a democracy at all? Why not just do it like Saudi Arabia's new city NEOM, where the financiers have complete control over every aspect of the city's government? Why do the nations of the world constantly need to whore themselves out to international capital?

Attached: professionsandpolitics.png (579x616 528.21 KB, 73.65K)

Other urls found in this thread:

igmchicago.org/surveys/net-neutrality-ii
ourworldindata.org/public-spending
data.oecd.org/gga/general-government-spending.htm
igmchicago.org/surveys/cubas-economy
igmchicago.org/surveys/fogel-on-slavery-2

smh

Liberal economy is a pseudoscience, they propagate ideology under the veil of objective, scientific rationality. They are absolutely dangerous. Economists can't even predict financial crisis or even argue for anything that isn't "more deregulation".

Neoliberalism is extremely profitable to a handful of people, they will keep going to the bitter end, no matter the cost. These people would rather have a world war raging than communism threatening their feudality.

Read Cockshott

i mean like, who doesn't like early retirement and getting all sorts of stuff, everyone does so it cant be radical or acting like a spoiled child. perhaps only like 1% of the population doesn't like getting free stuff, and studies show 1% of the population are sociopaths, so there you have it: neoliberalism.

i don't get it either. how can a country declare and intent to borrow money and then not be able to find creditors? it must be the sociopathic neoliberal ideological deception that loaning money doesn't guarantee that you will see it paid back


a shrugging handful of international finance

Anyone who thinks "Economics" isn't a sham, read what they have to say about net Neutrality.

igmchicago.org/surveys/net-neutrality-ii

Economics is just an extinction of Ideology.

It's amazing that "investors" screech and howl at the thought of the EU canceling debts in PIIGS countries, yet countries like Germany, France, and the US do the exact same thing through deflating our old debt into oblivion with our central banks, and they respond by happily slurp up fresh bonds from at negative interest as fast as we print them.

Of course people will refuse to lend them money if they are fiscally irresponsible and unstable, what I was getting at is why it is considered normal for governments to borrow money from private institutions at all, instead of just allowing their budgets to be limited by their tax incomes and federal banks.

Because those who make the rules have wealthy friends and each other support class interests?

This is the entire purpose of academia, and its propaganda is so pervasive I can almost guarantee I can name some belief you have which is based on this exact thing.

it's like a brainwashed cult

Reminder that Neo-Libs call the Labor Theory of Value False despite it having actual THEORY Behind it and being able to measured and proven while Propagating Supply and demand which relies on actual Feels>Reals Pseudo-Logic

I love how they talk about nebulous efficiency or improved goods (an argument that has been refuted in practice), completely ignoring the primary concern people have with the abolition of net neutrality.

The whole efficiency thing is a meme to begin with. A system has to be efficient at doing a particular thing. An LED lightbulb is more efficient than an incandescent bulb if you want to generate light. An incandescent bulb is more efficient if you want a heatlamp. Economists talk about efficiency at generating profit but conflate that with efficiency at meeting needs.

I still go to 4chan for the sole purpose of laughing at /biz/ everytime some economists tomd them wrong

*told

Idk, lack of empathy / myopia are common in people on the autistic spectrum.

Maybe the neoliberal part is what's sociopathic OP.

After all – wasn't Marx an economist?

OP is butthurt about empiricism

Attached: 483293462.jpg (600x582, 61.47K)

its literally a poll you moron

nice nonargument you got there, all those statistics of regulations worldwide lmao
ourworldindata.org/public-spending
data.oecd.org/gga/general-government-spending.htm
OOOPS
we live in a social democracy thats failing, wow thx leftist economists

Check out what they have to say about Cuba and slavery in the US
igmchicago.org/surveys/cubas-economy
igmchicago.org/surveys/fogel-on-slavery-2

Jeremiah 29:11~For I know the plans I have for you, " declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not harm you, plans to give you a hope and a future

Okay, let's bring back slavery since it is still profitable. I want to test them on empirical grounds and show then the frauds that they are.
Retarded ancap utopia here we come.