Is Economics considered a Science?

Depends on the type. Keynesians just make shit up, but Austrian economics uses plenty of complex models, math, and statistics to justify policy recommendations.

thisisbait.jpg

>Austrian economics
>math

Keynesians 'make shit up', despite Keynesian economics generating a tremendous increase in productivity and employment for the thirty or so years after WWII???

Keynesians make shit up, Austrians use intuition to explain economic behavior. The former is way more dangerous when governments plan around it.

It's about scams, lies and pyramid schemes to sell useless stuff to people with empty lives.

Explain what is 'made up' in Keynesian economics.

The system is proven to fucking WORK, so I am curious

now this is bait

America's economy flourished because it was one of the only developed nations that was left relatively unharmed by the war and had an entire continent with massive demand that could be met from the factories produced in the WW1 era.

Economics isn't quite a science. Economics makes generally scientific rules for money and capital management, but adds in individual desire.

Its weird, like if you were studying electron behavior in a wire, but couldn't account for how each electron's Tuesday went, how there career is going or how mentally unstable the electron is.

It doesn't change that the American government implemented monetary heavily influenced by Keynesianism.

In fact, the recent resurgence in Keynesian thought may have aided the recovery from the recession markedly.

In all honesty, it could be argued that the great depression and later recovery could've been resolved much earlier if Roosevelt hadn't spent so much money on stimulus.

Lets suffice it to say that if Roosevelt wasn't a successful commander in the second world war, his economic policy would be scrutinized for what it really was, a poor performance.

Roosevelt wasn't even in charge of the army once they landed. That was entrusted to an American who gave his duties to a Brit.

You can thank the Brits for involving us in the war in the first place.

Good one. Even if that was true, Roosevelt decided to pass the baton to the UK.

Go fuck off if you want to make excuses.

'Even if that were true'. Do you normally debate people and assert wild claims without knowing the facts?

Also, Winston Churchill expertly dragged us into the conflict with the Land Lease, by leasing land very close to Europe in exchange for 50 US destroyers.

The word science isn't in the name, so no.

Economics (to me at least) is a science of predicting future behavior for businesses. So I guess, since it uses Optimization math, I consider it both a social science and a Math science.

Economists do not propose laws or models from quantitative data. Economics employs deductive, not inductive, reasoning.

You can "make up" a theory without the use of empirical data first, which was the case there.

...

Yeah but ever since Adam Smith's index on silvers price in corn, empirical data has been used to justify and support the theories proposed.

It has so many minute complexities but is constantly generalised and simplified with the forceful shilling of philosophy and ideology. Most "economics" is literally just some cunts mentally masturbating and shilling some generalised concept. It's useless as a field, if you want to do economics, just ignore it, learn mathematics then apply it to economy. I suppose it is "science" is a skewed sense but not really. It's like taking retarded, ancient philosophical meanderings on anatomy and applying it to present-day biology.

yes it is no matter what spergs say on the internet
and austrian macroeconomics are considered a not funny joke

I have no idea what you're trying to say here, economics can be an intensely mathematical field. Read some Fisher or Keynes you idiot.

Tbh why shdnt econ be on here if math is.

economics is literally applied common sense + a bit of maths

It actually depends 100% on who you're reading. Some economists are all math, some are all words.

Qualifies as a science because economics uses the scientific methodology to test hypotheses and models created around empirical evidence.

Very, very low-tier science because of lack of predictive power and common use of many, often hugely impactful and overly simplified assumptions.

I think macro systems, uncontrollable variables, non-repeatable events/experiments, political/business influence, etc. make it hard for economists to practice scientific rigor. Consequently, the field lacks the scientific rigor seen in other sciences.

It's.. not considered a science

Itt fag brainlets who never took intro econ.