|
|
 Originally Posted by oskar
So we know for a fact that fewer or no workers rights results in very poor condition for workers in every scenario it has ever been tried in,
The idea that this is known is not true. For every example one can find that suggest one side, at least as many examples can be found that suggest the other side. My point is that each of those are irrelevant because there are too many unknowns, and I know that the examples appeal to confirmation bias.
Economics is philosophy. It is an argument about resource constraints and math. The empirical work done in economics -- and there is a lot -- is not worth the paper it's written on.
Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey
That's tantamount to disregarding any and all data which doesn't fit your expectations.
I disregard data that fits my expectations too. Well, I do that for the most part since I am human and flawed and sometimes accidentally don't. But I try to disregard data as it relates to theory in social "sciences" (because it doesn't relate reliably).
You can't really call it science, even in quotes, when that's your view.
I wish they were not called sciences, because they are not sciences. The social sciences being called science has led most of the world astray. The experimental sciences are real science. Things like economics are not science.
|
Reply With Quote