There is a whole debate about the “optimal” economic path during climate change, from a GDP perspective. One of the core issues is the question of interest rate. By assuming “market typical” interest rates around 1,4%, the future quickly gets discounted so much, that no matter the economic damage, because of the underlying growth assumptions, you end up with the Stern review marking 3°C as optimal economic outcome…
Discounting into the future, the whole interest rate and debt system, assuming growth… all of these are core positions of mainstream economics.
With the illusion of being a natural science rather than a social science, economics get way too much credit and of course there is a very problematic revolving door between financial institutions and economic research/education.
Economics is basically horoscopes for old rich white dudes. They veil their practice in “scientific” language/mathematical models and then have the audacity to make claims like “future consumption should be discounted simply because it takes place in the future and people generally prefer the present to the future (inherent discounting)” or create models on the assumption that growth is forever sustainable in a closed system with inherently limited natural resources.
Really is concerning that society has yet to break free from the influence of sooth sayers. There really isn’t much of a difference between the leaders of states listening to an economics major or listening to a young girl getting high on volcanic fumes at the temple of Delphi.
Most economic theorizing is, but the fundamentals are sound. There are simple equations that measure markets accurately, but they can’t tell you a thing about how material reality actually behaves. They cannot tell you which technologies will have which impact. They cannot predict the future any more than gut feelings, but basic principles can explain everything accurately after the fact.
Unfortunately, economics is the most valuable science to those with power, giving ample motivation for bs ideas to flourish and accurate ideas to be misused. All science gets sensationalized, but economics gets absolutely corrupted at all levels more than any other.
The optimal solution is to spend as much as you can into preventing climate change, because a dead planet has no economy. No customers = no income, no profit, no business.
But that requires looking past the next quarter.
Also I’m convinced economics “professionals” have all figured out that the whole system is bullshit that gets made up on a day to day basis by people who inherited their wealth, and just want to gift along with it. “I know it’s bullshit but they’re giving me money, so…”
The only things that assume infinite growth are viruses and parasites.
Not so fun thing:
There is a whole debate about the “optimal” economic path during climate change, from a GDP perspective. One of the core issues is the question of interest rate. By assuming “market typical” interest rates around 1,4%, the future quickly gets discounted so much, that no matter the economic damage, because of the underlying growth assumptions, you end up with the Stern review marking 3°C as optimal economic outcome…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stern_Review#Discounting
Discounting into the future, the whole interest rate and debt system, assuming growth… all of these are core positions of mainstream economics.
With the illusion of being a natural science rather than a social science, economics get way too much credit and of course there is a very problematic revolving door between financial institutions and economic research/education.
Economics is basically horoscopes for old rich white dudes. They veil their practice in “scientific” language/mathematical models and then have the audacity to make claims like “future consumption should be discounted simply because it takes place in the future and people generally prefer the present to the future (inherent discounting)” or create models on the assumption that growth is forever sustainable in a closed system with inherently limited natural resources.
Really is concerning that society has yet to break free from the influence of sooth sayers. There really isn’t much of a difference between the leaders of states listening to an economics major or listening to a young girl getting high on volcanic fumes at the temple of Delphi.
Most economic theorizing is, but the fundamentals are sound. There are simple equations that measure markets accurately, but they can’t tell you a thing about how material reality actually behaves. They cannot tell you which technologies will have which impact. They cannot predict the future any more than gut feelings, but basic principles can explain everything accurately after the fact.
Unfortunately, economics is the most valuable science to those with power, giving ample motivation for bs ideas to flourish and accurate ideas to be misused. All science gets sensationalized, but economics gets absolutely corrupted at all levels more than any other.
The optimal solution is to spend as much as you can into preventing climate change, because a dead planet has no economy. No customers = no income, no profit, no business.
But that requires looking past the next quarter.
Also I’m convinced economics “professionals” have all figured out that the whole system is bullshit that gets made up on a day to day basis by people who inherited their wealth, and just want to gift along with it. “I know it’s bullshit but they’re giving me money, so…”
The only things that assume infinite growth are viruses and parasites.