When did it all go wrong for the macroeconomics field?

exactly
game theory is full of diff equations, statistics, and real analysis

This is when Macroeconomics got screwed up.

When a bunch of economists decided that they needed to become engineers to study a political, sociological and psychological phenomenon.

what got "screwed up"?
using math to model complex processes?
economic value is quantifiable and the pursuit of maximization follows logic
fuck out of here with your ignorant brainlet opinions
>inb4 humans are too complex and unpredictable to be modeled with math

Its completely useless, tell me one thing ever achieved by macro. Even worse, thanks to economist giving shitty advice there been crashes and bad policies, every time you believe an economist, dont be surprised when you lose money.

>people misuse and misinterpret complex models
>therefore the models are wrong
idiot
stop pretending to know anything you are talking about. All the recent recessions or industry crashes are well documented and understood, and game theory can give an explaination how people can pursue individually beneficial actions that harm a market or industry
Macro is how the modern global economy is built and understood. Without macro we wouldn't have an understanding of money markets and investment, and many modern industries wouldn't exist today. Without macro, people would still try to print money to solve problems, or raise minimum wage yearly.
Just because some economists are wrong or politicians are in charge of economic legislation doesnt mean the models are
>wrong
>can't be improved
>or aren't worth studying
go fuck off to r/bernie you fag

No, macro is not how the world is built you absolute retard, probably all the actors in it never touched a macro book. Tell me a single thing ever achieved by economists, your field is in absolute crisis stop pretending

tell me a single thing math or physics has achieved? thats right, nothing because I am too stupid to understand it so its wrong
reply with some bs
>ur field is trash
bcause I'm not going to read it

>I will keep evading the question because I cant answer

The very computer you shitpost is thanks to physics/math , economics its a negative net contribution to society.

and econ is the reason these computers are as advanced and cheap as they are
Technology is a very competitive field that businesses can afford to invest a ton of cash into research and development by using profitable macroeconomic models.
If youre too stupid to understand the multiple answers I have already given you to your stupid and vague question, then I can't help you. If you don't know a single positive thing the field has produced then you are just way too uninformed to talk about it whatsoever

No, thats thanks to scientists,engineers,managers, business men and consumers. None of which is an economist, the fact that you talk about economy doesnt make you an economic actor, just as being a film critic doesnt make you a director

oh so businessmen cannot use economics? They don't benefit tremendously from the understanding of how industries and markets work?
You are claiming in one post it is the fault of economists when economies fail, but in another economists are completely seperate to businesses and businessmen. If that is the case then how can economists be responsible for the failings of economies?
Your posts are just so inconsistent and illogical. You sound like a rambling highschool communist
Goodnight

>scientific discovery has been made profitable by thousands of years of economic study and application
its just business men duh economics is useless
>an economy predictably crashes as a result of people misusing economic models
damn economists don't know anything, I told you so

>Its completely useless, tell me one thing ever achieved by macro

>2 stage least squares regression
>the laws of supply and demand
>most of game theory
>all the contributions to statistics Pareto ever developed

>Economists are business men

Top fucking kek, this is how I see you never touched any industry, in fact, CEOs prefer intution and experience and disregard and even mock economists thinking (I forgot that finance joke).

Economists only have influence in the public sector, where your colleages like Greenspan caused a lot of harm, I really doubt you can prove that the contribution is net positive.

But this is much simpler, economics is the only place where two economist can agree in absolutely nothing. You dont have an unified theory and that makes you a meme. Good luck

>The most complex man made system ever known doesn't have a unified theory after only 200 years of studying it

>DOOD ITS A MEME

This

You are a meme today

>he's proud of his high school math knowledge
>he thinks economists use more math than engineers
Look at this dude.

>get a masters in econ
>get a private sector job
>econ in now irrelevant to me
Just because someone isn't an official "economist" doesn't mean they can't apply what they learned and contribute to the fiels

>You dont have an unified theory
Supply and demand is the unified theory

Neoclassical synthesis.

It destroyed Keynesian economics.

>When did it all go wrong for the macroeconomics field?

John Maynard Keynes.

> It's a Veeky Forums takes micro 101 and thinks the rest of the degree is as easy as that
I love these threads

The diamond-dybvig model of bank runs has been proven time and time again by the Fed Reserve (and the absence of something similar in Europe) to be correct almost to a T. It's why you aren't in a line at a soup kitchen right now.

There's no I in microeconomics

Macro-nutrients

MycryPtic Economies
//
有微觀經濟學沒有我
常量營養元素
神秘的經濟

>cutting taxes while the economy is good

Is Trump the only real Keynesian in decades?

when they stopped listening to common sense

This nigga so far ahead of the curve industrial civilization will collapse before his ideas are realized

Its honestly a shame, I feel like Veeky Forums could actually have some reasonably interesting Econ discussions but posters here can't get over the ego boost they get from attacking straw man portrayals of other fields

Because depression caused by the state is always a good idea.

you have to realize a lot of people on Veeky Forums are lolbertarians, ron paul fans that fell for the austrian school meme and believe all economists are therefore hacks and modern economics an excuse to expand the gubbement

>economics
>science
nigger

Calling economics no science is one of the most stupid things I've ever heard. Economics is a social science. A science about the behavior of people in a ecomomy.

media.giphy.com/media/4oaudibTMnmqQ/giphy.gif

majority of economics IS demand side

>Economics is just as much of a science as Chemistry
No, change chemistry to psychology/sociology and you'd be closer to being correct. Chemistry is a natural science where as Econ is a social science.

When sumo Was Born As Simon Wrestling

not quite sure you understand what he said

that reach though

Economics has a lot if math, especially at a higher level.

Macro is mostly incorrect because it assumes that observed relations are mathematically true (see Philips Curve). The math that follows is sound, but it all rests on shaky premises.

Most micro is tautologically true, and you can build models from the ground up.

That's because a majority of nations are marxist.

It's philosophy, and it was relatively poignant philosophy up until the turn of the century.

Lol what. Most people who try for an econ PhD double major in math and econ or just did econ as a minor and majored in math. They then take graduate math and stat classes in any good program econ program, and this is assuming they aren't in a really econometrics type niche.

Engineers take a fourth of the math classes.

this
I studied both, the most math I did for engineering was calc3 which wasn't that bad
I saw the graduate level econ math and it scared me