Economists are a group of people who are over-trusted but not worthy of their name.
1 Are the economists' predictions about housing prices correct? Almost none. Did economists predict the financial crisis correctly? Almost none, do you believe what economists say? Hardly believe it.
Does the technological revolution have anything to do with economists? It doesn't matter. Does the rise of the Internet have anything to do with economists? It doesn't matter. If it is a group of entrepreneurs and technological innovators who are driving the progress of the world, which of them have benefited from economists? Almost none, that's weird. Economists are so useless. Why do they slander the market, the old gods are there, cheating and drinking, and taking high appearance fees?
Domestic economists tore up again
They opposed whatever Lin Afoot supported. Lin Afoot supported the role of ZF. He was embarrassed to use Keynesian words and used a new Sign-New Structural Econs tuition in Singapore, which is called surpassing Keynesian ism. As far as the ideological context is concerned, the core is still Keynesian propositions. Many domestic economic circles dislike Keynesian ism. Opposing Lin Yahoo's propositions becomes an obligation and mission. Lin Afoot always stands on the cusp of the storm. After the opening of the new structuralism economics, an important client, Jilin Provincial Party Committee and Province Z, came to him and asked him to prescribe prescriptions. How to start the revitalisation of Northeast China? As soon as the plan was launched, it was met with all sorts of misfortunes. The miserable party didn't need to seriously and disdain to look at the plan, and just took the opportunity to advocate a liquidation with Lin Afoot. This is the situation in the domestic economics circle. The posture of quarrels among economists is actually not good, and they oppose it for the sake of opposition. At least, Lin Afoot has merits. His plan is public, but the opposition party never mentions a plan except for conceptual offences. The market will fail, and ZF will fail. Companies and industries may have died for several waves and have undergone several iterations. Economists are still using past statistical data to model, and they are still arguing about the boundary between the market and Z. Arguing whether or not industrial policies are required, rather than researching into areas where different markets disagree, and the development stages and characteristics of different industries. Is such an economist particularly wasteful of food? Is such an economist becoming more and more useless? Is such an economist untrustworthy?
More learn here Besteconstuition Thanks.
Comments