February 8, 2019

Socialism and scientific incompetence

Comment on David Ruccio on ‘Socialism and exploitation’

Blog-Reference and Blog-Reference on Feb 14

There is no such thing as economics. There are TWO fundamentally different types of economics: political economics and theoretical economics. The main differences are: (i) The goal of political economics is to successfully push an agenda, the goal of theoretical economics is to successfully explain how the actual economy works. (ii) In political economics anything goes; in theoretical economics, the scientific standards of material and formal consistency are observed.

For non-economists, the most important thing is to realize is that theoretical economics (= science) had been hijacked from the very beginning by political economists (= agenda pushers). Political economics has produced NOTHING of scientific value in the last 200+ years. Economics is a failed science. The four main approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent, and all got the foundational concept of the subject matter ― profit ― wrong.

As a result, since Adam Smith/Karl Marx economic policy guidance NEVER had sound scientific foundations. Economists of all colors sell proto-scientific garbage in the bluff package of science.

This, of course, holds also for Marxianism:
  • Marx’s profit theory is provably false.#1
  • By consequence, the concepts of exploitation and classes are false. Marx lacks the concept of cross-over exploitation.#2, #3
  • Because the foundational concepts are false, Marx’s whole analytical superstructure is false.
  • Because the theory is defective, Marxian economic policy guidance was bound to fail from the very beginning.#4, #5
  • After-Marxians have not spotted Marx’s foundational blunder to this day.#6, #7
  • Marxians are scientifically incompetent just like non-Marxians and all together are only employable as useful political idiots.

Because both Capitalism and Socialism have no sound scientific foundations, their respective economic policies are not much more than blind political agenda pushing. Never forget that both left-wing and right-wing economists do NOT know what profit is and how the actual monetary economy works.

David Ruccio concludes: “Workers, especially young workers, are suffering the consequences of increased exploitation and beginning to look beyond capitalism, to different ways of organizing the U.S. economy and society.” If so, what is their winning formula? Go for it but do NOT think that economists have any solutions for you or that they are of any help. Forget this Capitalism/Socialism thing. For 200+ years, economists are incompetent blatherers who are too stupid for the elementary mathematics that underlies macroeconomics. Independent of their political color, economists have always been a real hazard to their fellow citizens.#8

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

#1 Profit for Marxists
#2 Capitalism, poverty, exploitation, and cross-over exploitation
#3 If we only had classes
#4 Ricardo, too, got profit theory wrong
#5 Ricardo and the invention of class war
#6 MMT and Marxism ― blather as immunizing stratagem
#7 MMT ― backstop or advanced life support for the Oligarchy?
#8 Econogenics in action


REPLY to Tom Hickey, Clint Ballinger on Feb 16

Profit and rent is, in the final analysis, the same thing. Ricardo messed things up and in 200+ years, economists still have not realized it.#1, #2, #3

#1 When Ricardo Saw Profit, He Called It Rent: On the Vice of Parochial Realism
#2 Ricardo, too, got profit theory wrong
#3 Ricardo and the invention of class war