Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXXV)

“Every model is wrong” (Econ-Meme, quoted by Shahin Ashkiani)

Somebody plays with the different meanings of 'wrong'. Economics is failed/fake science, and economists need tons of smart excuses. The ultimate reason why economics is 'wrong' is the scientific incompetence of the… pic.twitter.com/fSuxdJXvzR

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 20, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CVIII)

 

“What Mises showed is that rational economic planning without prices can't be done.“ (Mises Media, Bob Murphy)

von Mises never understood profit, and by logical consequence, how the economic system works. The fundamental concept of economics is profit, and because von Mises gets… pic.twitter.com/S8TAHhRupa

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 19, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CVII)

“Roger Garrison helped modernize one of the most important insights in Austrian macroeconomics.” (Foundations for Economic Education)

Austrians never understood the profit mechanism, which is the pivotal feature of the free-market economy.

Macroeconomic profit Qm is given by… pic.twitter.com/jLTnUdN3EY

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 19, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLVI)

“Friedman basically didn’t think that a democratic society could be liberal as a democratic majority could vote into power a socialist government.” (Daniel Steinmetz-Jenkins)

This may be right or wrong, but it's not economics.

Milton Friedman never understood profit and, as a… pic.twitter.com/3QEBQ5VgVL

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 19, 2026

Occasional X: How it works (CDLXXVII)

 

“You claim to have refuted Austrian methodology. … The disagreement is about where profit actually comes from.” (NReadmoore)

Yes, and I claim that you are unable to understand (i) science, (ii) economics, (iii) math/accounting, and (iv) profit.

You agree that profit is… pic.twitter.com/8uUNcRTQmN

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 19, 2026

Occasional X: Economic policy guidance has never had valid scientific foundations (XXIII)

“Unless we understand what it is that leads to economic and financial instability, we cannot prescribe policy to modify or eliminate it.” (Hyman Minsky)

Trivially true.

For over 200 years, economics has claimed to be a science, but it still isn't. The major approaches… pic.twitter.com/0tIV1BFSRp

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLV)

“And in real world, unlike to Mises' fantasy land, you can sell an inferior product using the power of marketing.“ (Shahin Ashkiani)

What von Mises said about marketing was incompetent enough, but what he said about profit is self-annihilation.

von Mises never understood… pic.twitter.com/BRhqfvNnUx

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

Occasional X: Great economic equations (II)

“Equations that transformed the world.” (MathFiles)

For the field of economics, see ⇒
The great economic equationshttps://t.co/sUiSaCV5G0 pic.twitter.com/SGH8ik9gdn

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

For more about equations, see AXECquery. 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXXIV)

“Just calling a S-D association modelling a 'law' shows someone is illiterate. This level of positivist idiocy is criminally high.” (Shahin Ashkiani)

The founding fathers have defined economics as a social science, and accordingly, it has been based on subjective/behavioral… pic.twitter.com/yndknWkMlF

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

Occasional X: Economics debates ― nothing more than communicative hardcore wrestling (II)

“I was on the 'Team Hayek' side of a debate with Ned Phelps. 'Team Keynes' was Jamie Galbraith and some journalists.” (Lawrence White)

Lawrence White does not know the difference between political economics and economics as a science. ⇓ In the communicative Circus Maximus, it… pic.twitter.com/7OkAXC6v2O

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

For more about communicative hardcore wrestling, see AXECquery. 

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLIV)

“From just a cursory look at your site, it seems your economic worldview consists mainly of claiming other schools of thought are wrong and yours is right, but never saying what it is or giving even a small glimpse of it.” (Egon Alter)

Next time you better use Artificial… pic.twitter.com/4m1z8lUqGG

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 18, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Breakdown (XXVI)

“Your grandchildren won't even pay off Labour’s 100bn debt. The interest alone costs us about 5bn every single year. What did we get for all that money?” (NuZillund)

NuZillund has no clue how the economy works.

The free-market economy runs on profit. Macroeconomic profit Qm is…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 17, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Price Mechanism (XV)

 

“It is not people, it is your tool that is rubbish. It puts 'price' in the centre of attention, and not only that but a nonsensical concept: Equilibrium price.” (Shahin Ashkiani)

The supply-demand-equilibrium concept has been dead for more than 100 years.‡

For details, see… pic.twitter.com/BO2CEqDfV5

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 17, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXXIII)

“… and refusing to engage with any of the substantive points.” (NReadmoore)

The opposite is true. Summary of AXEC's argument:

(1) Premise: A monetary economy without profit cannot exist.

(2) In mathematical terms, the objective/systemic minimum requirement is Qm≥0.

(3) The…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 17, 2026

Related 'The Profit Law' 

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CVI)

“This is not a methodological disagreement. This is a direct denial of the actual subject matter of economics.“ (NReadMoore)

As a matter of fact, this is a refutation of Austrian methodology. The subject matter of economics is not Praxeology but the economic System. Human Nature…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 16, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CV)

“A professor proposed ethno-mathematics: maybe 2+2 could be something else in your culture.” (Mises Media)

Yes, question the premises, but don't stop there. Advance to the Paradigm Shift. The new premises represent the ultimate critique of the old ones.

This applies primarily…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 16, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXXII)

 

“'Time preference' is one of the sharpest concepts in the Austrian School of Economics. … Those who exhibit 'high time preference' prioritize immediate gratification: consume today, go into debt, plunder the present. Those with 'low time preference' sacrifice current pleasures… pic.twitter.com/UaWMvDvQEx

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 16, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXL)

“'Monetary expansion' and 'quantitative easing' are just euphemisms for counterfeiting. Counterfeiting is evil.” (Joshia Lippincott, quoted by Mises Institute)

The Mises folks never understood profit. Because profit is the foundational economic concept, to get it wrong means to… pic.twitter.com/nYe9KDJQlJ

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 16, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXXI)

“Even supercomputers won’t solve the problems inherent to central planning.” (Jacobin)

Science is about true/false, not about left/right. This applies in particular to economics. Economists have never understood the difference between politics and science. This is why economics… pic.twitter.com/bmESIfmV2O

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 16, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXX)

“… economics studies purposeful human action, not inanimate objects.“ (NReadMoore)

No. Austrians are in the wrong film.

Human Nature/motives/behavior/action are the subject matter of psychology, sociology, political science, social philosophy, history, anthropology, biology,…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Marx (LIX)

“Marx completed the inversion. Surplus was no longer understood as mere excess product, but as surplus labor embodied in value form.” (Beyon.D)

False, again!

Because Marx got the foundational magnitude of economics —profit— wrong, his communicative contribution reduces to…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Occasional X: Paradigm Shift (CXI)

“Even by standards of evolutionary theory, it's not clear whether economics is a science, yet: …” (oc)

The founding fathers have defined economics as a social science, and accordingly, it has been based on subjective/behavioral assumptions/axioms. This has been the… pic.twitter.com/IWUvJ1QUz7

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Related 'Critique is good, refutation is better, Paradigm Shift is best'. 

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLIII)

“Economics is the study of the economy, not the study of economists.” (Ricardo Reis)

“Then he enrolled in economics 301, the legendary Frank Knight's price theory course at Chicago. Knight was crusty, skeptical, and intellectually devastating. His course went well beyond…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Related: 'Key Issues: One way to get profit right, many ways to get it wrong' 

Occasional X: Economists’ eternal problem with methodology (XIII)

“The sectoral identity is true by definition after the fact.“ (NReadMoore)

This is one of the dumbest statements in all of methodology. It clearly shows the scientific incompetence of Austrians.

When an apple falls from the tree, science tells one exactly which distance it has…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLIII)

“In a 1920 paper, Ludwig Heinrich Edler von Mises (German; 29 September 1881 – 10 October 1973) an Austrian School economist, historian, logician, and sociologist wrote and lectured extensively on socialism. He is best known for his work on praxeology studies which compared… pic.twitter.com/UCbVgIJ7zu

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLII)

Austrians do not understand the pivotal economic concept of profit. As a consequence, Austrianism is not a science. Every intelligent layman with some scientific instinct can replicate the proof.

How the intelligent non-economist can refute every economist hands down…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 15, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Breakdown (XXV)

“Japan carries the world's highest debt-to-GDP ratio (~260%). As rates rise, the cost of servicing that debt becomes alarming, and investors are demanding a risk premium.” (Tobias Carlisle)

If you didn't see this coming since 2020‡, you are scientifically incompetent.

The…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLI)

“Hayek’s work on price theory is central to my thinking about how to manage the Wikipedia project. One can’t understand my ideas about Wikipedia without understanding Hayek.” (Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia co-founder)

The founding fathers have defined economics as a social science, and…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXIX)

“'If you wish to converse with me,' said Voltaire, 'define your terms.' How many a debate would have been deflated into a paragraph if the disputants had dared to define their terms! This is the alpha and omega of logic, the heart and soul of it, that every important term in…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCL)

“Absolutely agree that the insane premises/deductions are likely MMT.“ (Aristrides)

You don't do much research before spouting off your uninformed guesses on X, do you?

Both MMT and Keynesianism are refuted on all counts. For those of your Austrian friends who can read and have…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCIX)

“I'd almost bet you my LIFE you aren't able to define 'profit' properly.“ (Conza)

You don't do much research before spouting off your uninformed opinion on social media, do you?

Profit (not mathematics) is the keyhttps://t.co/dUWhvczxy1

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Economics is not about smelling but thinking, if you know what I mean. Educate yourself. Start now. You are light-years behind the curve.

First Lecture in New Economic Thinkinghttps://t.co/UGl1M4831W

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CIV)

“I see you’re unfamiliar with Ludwig von Mises.“ (NReadMoore)

I wonder how you can see what I read.

“He wrote extensively on profit, far more than most economists.”

Yes, he did, but all that was proto-scientific garbage. The problem is not how much he wrote but whether it is…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Profit (CLI)

“Or we can keep it simple.” (thatoriginalist)

This is the characteristic Austrian The-Earth-Stands-Still logic. It is practically right for myopic morons, but scientifically dead wrong. Microeconomic Austrians habitually commit the Fallacy of Composition, i.e., they don't…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 14, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CIII)

“Praxeology is the rigorous, deductive method that defines Austrian economics and offers the only logically sound way to do economics.“ (Creative Deduction)

von Mises never understood profit, and by logical consequence, how the economic system works. To this day, Austrian…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

Occasional X: Paradigm Shift (CX)

“Keynes knew very little economics... He was much more concerned with influencing policy at a particular moment than developing a true theory.” (Friedrich Hayek)

Neither Keynes nor Hayek developed the true theory.

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was… pic.twitter.com/LNsh8I8oek

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Marx (LVIII)

 

Marx never understood profit.

For proof, see the working paper ⇒
Profit for Marxistshttps://t.co/fQinxTPBcJ

Stigler did not understand that Marx never understood profit.

Elliotism did not understand that Stigler did not understand that Marx never understood profit.

With…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXVIII)

“Very much looking forward to the 𝐙𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐐𝐮𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐩 next week! Excited to welcome an outstanding group of macroeconomists pushing the very frontier …” (Yucheng Yang)

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was… pic.twitter.com/up9loOrYhm

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

For more about the Starting Problem, see AXECquery. 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXVII)

“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” (Meme, quoted by Brian Albrecht)

Not true. The correct economics is concentrated to the minimum in the formula below. ⇓ It turns the libraries of Walrasian, Keynesian,… pic.twitter.com/eiRpitGcRg

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CII)

“And no my friend, capitalism NEVER relies on government deficits, we abhor and condemn politicians’ wasteful overspending and squandering.” (Hubertus the Austrian)

Everybody hates 'politicians’ wasteful overspending'. That's not economics. Everybody does it. Everybody… pic.twitter.com/172bO45XCM

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 13, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (CI)

“The task of economics is to explain action using a priori logic, and empirical science is impossible in economics, stipulates Mises.” (TakingHayekSeriously)

The founding fathers have defined economics as a social science, and accordingly, it has been based on…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXXXIX)

 

“If you want to understand money and monetary theory, you have to read this book.” (Fabian Wintersberger)

Download the book and search for the word profit. The result is zero. An economics book that fails to mention profit is scientifically worthless. That holds for Austrianism…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (C)

“The State Theory [of Money; MMT] is not a bad monetary theory; it is not a monetary theory at all. “ (Ludwig von Mises, quoted by Fabian Wintersberger)

von Mises never understood profit, and by logical consequence, how the economic system works. To this day, Austrian economics…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Kalecki (XV)

 

Because Marx got the foundational concept of economics —profit— wrong, his communicative contribution reduces to psycho-social-political-philosophical blubber.

Marx/Engels called their common project Scientific Socialism, but its scientific content has been zero from the…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXVI)

“One wonders, since he had so little time and knew nothing about economics how did he manage to write 'The treatise....' and 'The General Theory' ...” (Branko Milanovic)

Branko Milanovic does not know the difference between political economics and economics as a science. ⇓ It… pic.twitter.com/v4tHrH0g1g

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Related 'Complexity, scientific incompetence, and the art of asking the right questions' 

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (XCIX)

“Mises already understood the modern MMT claim that the government can print as much money as it needs.” (Fabian Wintersberger)

The Mises folks never understood profit. Because profit is the foundational economic concept, to get it wrong means to get the entire science of…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 12, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Employment (XXXII)

“Mises: wages cannot be set by institutions. They are a market phenomenon.” (Fabian Wintersberger)

von Mises was a common-sense microeconomist who did not understand what profit is, and consequently, how the economic system works. He will be finally buried in the darkest corner… pic.twitter.com/4YMHzF0svS

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 11, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Kalecki (XIV)

Kalecki got the subject's foundational concept — profit — wrong. This is self-disqualifying. Even today, his followers are too stupid to understand the elementary algebra that underlies macroeconomic accounting.

For proof, see
Kalecki got it wrong, Allais got it right…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 11, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXV)

“Die 4 ökonomischen Denkschulen. / The 4 schools of economic thought.” (Der rosarote Panzer)

The history of economic thought is the history of scientific failure.

Economics claims to be Science, but it isn't. The major approaches (Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism,… pic.twitter.com/DaYuc9dWSa

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 11, 2026

 

 For more about poultry entrails reading, see AXECquery.

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (XCVIII)

“Keynes knew very little economics... He was much more concerned with influencing policy at a particular moment than developing a true theory.” (Friedrich Hayek)

That's right.

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was too stupid for elementary algebra.… pic.twitter.com/lAM374w4nF

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 11, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (XCVII)

“The delusion that macroeconomics is both viable and useful is encouraged by its extensive use of mathematics, which must always impress politicians lacking any mathematical education.” (Friedrich Hayek)

That sentence sums up the whole problem with the Austrian method. The… pic.twitter.com/gICthRlU1b

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 11, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXXXVIII)

“Economist Jesús Huerta de Soto argues that central banks face the same knowledge problem that Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek identified in socialism.” (Foundation for Economic Education)

Central Banks face no knowledge problem, except for random natural events. As a…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 10, 2026

Occasional X: How it works (CDLXXVI)

 

“The immense power of the new plutocracy: How billionaires like Musk, Bezos and Zuckerberg shape our lives and our democracies.” (Branko Milanovic)

Billionaires are not independent and innovative entrepreneurs who risk their own money to create progress for humanity, but…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 10, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXIV)

“You open by quoting Klant on scientific standards and then immediately declare that Austrian economics 'has been proven to be logically inconsistent' because we 'get profit wrong.' This is still just an assertion.” (Yang)

Austrians never had any idea of science, and Yang is no… pic.twitter.com/8Z3K575hyX

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 9, 2026

Related: 'Economists: scientists or political clowns?' and 'The curious non-existence of profit in economics' and 'Profit: after 200+ years still elusive' and 'The miracle cure of economists’ micro-macro schizo' and 'Clueless economists / Science (CCXCXIII)'

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXIII)

Scientific standards are well-defined: “Research is, in fact, a continuous discussion of the consistency of theories: formal consistency insofar as the discussion relates to the logical cohesion of what is asserted in joint theories; material consistency insofar as the agreement…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 9, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (XCVI)

“If you strip away that fancy façade of notation, you are essentially left with the same old 'government deficit = private sector surplus' identity everyone who understands basic accounting already knows is true by definition.” (Yang)

The sentence 'true by definition' is the… pic.twitter.com/Y95UVoltA2

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Related 'Profit, income, and the Humpty Dumpty Fallacy' 

 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Profit (CL)

“Government deficit = private sector surplus (math, not a theory)” (?whispers?)

There is no such thing as the Private Sector, but only the household sector and the business sector. The respective balances are saving Sm and profit Qm. So, the correct formula says Government… pic.twitter.com/4n8Vnwmh4R

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Also on fiat money. 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXII)

“Franklin Roosevelt’s pragmatism and John Maynard Keynes’s ideas 'saved capitalism from the capitalists', writes Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel-prizewinning economist.” (Economist)

Neither Roosevelt nor Keynes understood how the economic system works. Both just applied common sense.…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Related 'Economists ― medics or barber-surgeons?' 

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCVII)

“Well, try maximizing that 'aggregate profit' through government … You're just justifying genocide by maximizing a dumb accounting system pursuing numbers that don't make sense.” (Cezary Baginski)

The Profit Law is a specific application of elementary math, i.e., 5=7-2. This is…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCVI)

“So if the general public holds increasing cash balances and the money supply is constant, you conclude that business have suffered a loss?” (Bushido)

No.

What I say is: Macroeconomic profit or loss Qm is given by the axiomatically correct Profit Law…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCXI)

“Mathematics brought rigor to Economics. Unfortunately, it also brought mortis. (Kenneth E. Boulding)

As cargo cult scientists, economists copied the dominant math of their time: calculus. They never understood that their specific branch of math is the elementary algebra that… pic.twitter.com/UBx9Q8N3WY

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 8, 2026

Related 'The common error of common sense: an essential rectification of the accounting approach' 

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle MMT (CCIII)

“Did you not just recreate MMT’s 'public dept is private net savings' from first principles?” (Doxasryx)

No.

For MMT's full-spectrum refutation, see
Cross-references: MMThttps://t.co/eXlgPKrinA

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Related 'Grok: the final implosion of MMT'

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCX)

“Neither was Marx a dye-in-wool economist.Rather he &Engels did division of labour to study diverse sciences,social sciences.His books did create a cyclopean ideology that served ultimate purpose but first brought catastrophic upheavals.” (Chris Ugosky)

Because Marx got the…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Profit (CXLIX)

“Is monetary profit the same thing to you as (increasing) cash balances?” (Bushido)

Monetary profit is the difference between flows and a change in stock. ⇓ pic.twitter.com/nBXTFtga4a

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCV)

“Adam Smith used the phrase 'invisible hand' just once in The Wealth of Nations. And yet it became the defining idea of modern economics. ” (Mariana Mazzucato)

Adam Smith was not an original thinker, not a scientist, not an economist; he was a populist moralizer. ⇓ People like… pic.twitter.com/G6UYL5376G

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: There is an absolute limit to the growth of public debt (IV)

“Debt by itself is a lousy guide. A $500,000 mortgage can be manageable or terrifying depending on salary, rates, and future earnings. Same with countries: the real question isn’t 'how much debt?' but 'can they carry it?' (Justin Wolfers)

That's a lousy answer. Private…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Inflation / Deflation / Stagflation (XLXXI)

“Inflation emerges when financially validated monetary claims grow faster than the economy’s nominal carrying capacity for surplus realization at existing prices. — Marx · Kalecki · Young. (Beyon)

Both Marx and Kalecki got profit wrong. So, forget them.

The axiomatically… pic.twitter.com/ho9DXCrRto

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCIX)

“Is Libertarianism Incoherent?” (Mises Wire)

Yes.

The Mises folks never understood profit. Because profit is the foundational economic concept, to get it wrong means to get the entire science of economics wrong.

The free-market economy runs on profit. Macroeconomic profit is…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026 

“If government deficits were the foundation of capitalism, then the larger the state, the richer society should become. Austrian economics says the opposite …” (Asuijuris)

The Profit Law says that profit depends on the public deficit, not the size of the State. The State can be…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

If anyone can access the true national accounting figures for Zimbabwe, they will discover that the Profit Law is accurate to two decimal places.

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 7, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Profit (CXLVIII)

“Maybe he can use Claude to discover that the National Debt is really savings and the money supply? My AI says it is.” (Bill Goggin)

The free-market economy runs on profit. Macroeconomic profit is given by the axiomatically correct Profit Law / Balances Equation…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Marx (LVII)

“Nobody has ever debunked Karl Marx.” (RTSG)

Marx and his followers never understood profit, economics, and science.

For proof, see the working paper ⇒
Profit for Marxistshttps://t.co/fQinxTPBcJ

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Austrianism (XCV)

 

von Mises never understood profit, and by logical consequence, how the economic system works. This is self-disqualifying.

The free-market economy runs on profit. Macroeconomic profit is given by the axiomatically correct Profit Law / Balances Equation… pic.twitter.com/VinT3ijPZF

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCIV)

The history of economic thought is the history of scientific failure. The major approaches are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent. They all got profit wrong. Marx was NO exception.

For proof, see the working paper ⇒
Profit for…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

Occasional X: Economics and math ― they just can't get it together (XI)

“That’s what I do in my undergrad advanced macro course. We then solve the log-linearized model by hand and use Excel for numerical examples.” (Fabio Ghironi, quoting Alvares Chaves)

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was too stupid for elementary…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

I forgot the appendix. Here it is.

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXXXVII)

“If not for the stability and reliability of gold underpinning paper currencies for decades or centuries, no one would accept unbacked government money printed on worthless paper.” (Jp Cortez, quoting Mises Media)

The Mises folks are not scientists; they are look-alikes. They…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 6, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Profit (CXLVII)

“These theories, whatever they may claim, do not stem from the search for objective truth.” (David Gordon)

“It is capitalism that is not only the most efficient economic system, but the only economic system that is efficient.” (David Gordon)

The decisive criterion of economics…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 5, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCVIII)

“Competence, and competence alone, is the threshold which separates superstition from science.” (alz)

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was too stupid for elementary algebra. Consequently, he botched the long-overdue Paradigm Shift from microfoundations… pic.twitter.com/gpufnAwBGU

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 5, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Marx (LVI)

“Marxism is one of the most intellectually powerful methods ever developed for understanding capitalism.” (A. J. Horn, quoted by Monthly Review)

The history of economic thought is the history of scientific failure. The major approaches are mutually contradictory, axiomatically… pic.twitter.com/vQDcqcrBT6

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 5, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCIII)

“The problem with macro-development is that it is not a science. Recently, economists increasingly like pretending their field is a science, meaning macro-development has ceded lots of ground to the much more scientific, but much less useful, field of micro-development.” (alz,… pic.twitter.com/hiGevNQHNj

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 5, 2026

Occasional X: How it works (CDLXXV)

 

“There is only one way to fix the US debt problem: to invoke Article V of the US Constitution and amend it to include a debt brake.” (Steve Hanke)

Economic policy has no valid scientific foundations. Psychological plausibility is not the same thing as scientific validity.…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 5, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle MMT (CCII)

You don't need a book to refute MMT. The two fatal mistakes are:

• The MMT balances equation is provably false.
• The MMT policy of deficit spending/money creation is to the advantage of WeTheOligarchy and the disadvantage of WeThePeople.

MMT is scientifically and politically… pic.twitter.com/27xR0GAlRc

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 4, 2026

Occasional X: Paradigm Shift (CIX)

 

“One of the things you will notice about critics of economics is that they never actually show you a flaw in the model. They have incredibly strawmanned views of what economic models are. When you walk them through economic models, they show themselves as literally incapable of… pic.twitter.com/pNPzakNaxZ

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 4, 2026

Related 'Feeble minds, shaky assumptions, and the inevitable failure of economics' 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXXXVI)

 

“Warren Buffett just warned that the US dollar could collapse and admitted he doesn't understand most of the stock market anymore.” (Ricardo)

The stock market is easier to understand if you got the Monetary Theory right, which tells you that the Central Bank 'makes' the stock…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 4, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle MMT (CCI)

 

“I doubt your little pamphlet debunks the extremely erudite Textbook, MACROECONOMICS, by PHD MMT Economists from the USA & Australia, Professor s Mitchell, Wray, & Watts!” (Theresa Sanders)

The MMT textbook has already been refuted. Theresa Sanders is somewhat behind the curve.…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 3, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Money (CXXXV)

“Who contols money, how & why is key.” (DecentraliseEverything)

For the axiomatically correct approach, see the working paper ⇒
The Dark-Matter Theory of Fiat Moneyhttps://t.co/x4NOcsCBMS

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 3, 2026

Also on MMT for Progressives

 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCVII)

“You contradict yourself. You say economics isn't a science and I agree along with these statements you made. And yet you assert that profit is a specific scientific formula, …” (DecentraliseEverything)

Legacy economics is provably false. The proofs are available. However,… pic.twitter.com/Ukyy4UxzDf

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 3, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCII)

“Keynes was a pedophile and I always call him 'British pedophile John Maynard Keynes' and I’m not planning on stopping anytime soon.” (Handre)

Science is about true/false not about good/bad. The scientific fact about Keynes is that his macroeconomics is provably false. For… pic.twitter.com/zuflEfjuy0

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 3, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCVI)

“Economics is the study of the economy, not the study of economists.” (Ricardo Reis)

Fake scientists are easy to spot; they always go against the person and never methodologically refute the material/formal point in question. From the fact that David Andolfatto attacks Nassim… pic.twitter.com/nyGKnp5gdD

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 3, 2026

Related 'New Economic Thinking, or, let’s put lipstick on the dead pig' 

Occasional X: Forget supply-demand-equilibrium (XXII)

“It always feels very funny when I'm looking at a journal article and they pull up the basic supply and demand graph.” (Jack Whitcomb)

There is no such thing as supply-demand-equilibrium. The Totem of the Micro needs to be replaced by the macroeconomic Unit Circle ⇓.

For the… pic.twitter.com/2wkJRbWypc

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXCI)

“… NNT has basically not engaged with academic works that are SOTA since the 1980s.” (MFZ)

Reminder that “academic works that are SOTA since the 1980s” are an institutional self-hallucination. They are not Science, but what Feynman called cargo cult science. ⇓… pic.twitter.com/JF3mr05wIN

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCV)

“None of these accounting details alter the consolidated government budget constraint, the intertemporal solvency condition, or the equilibrium conditions pinning down prices and quantities.” (MFZ)

The founding fathers have defined economics as a social science, and accordingly,… pic.twitter.com/RQEJRKErvz

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCXC)

“Two books anyone who opined on economics should read: …” (Khoa Vu)

The major approaches (Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, and their derivatives) are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent. They all got profit…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle MMT (CC)

 

For MMT's full-spectrum debunking, see
Cross-references: MMThttps://t.co/eXlgPKrinA

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCIV)

 

“15 ECONOMISTS WHO PREDICTED THE FUTURE CORRECTLY: …” (Unfiltered)

Economics is said to be a science, but it isn't. The major approaches (Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, and their derivatives) are mutually contradictory and axiomatically false and…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

For more about reading poultry entrails, see AXECquery. 

Occasional X: I=S ― the biggest idiocy in macroeconomics (II)

“Many problems in modern economic theory arise from a weak understanding of accounting and the System of National Accounts. A classic example is the identity 'investment = saving.'” (Khazbi Budonov)

Keynes, too, misunderstood the concept of profit because he was too stupid for… pic.twitter.com/vgfPK8COgV

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Related 'I=S: Mark of the Incompetent' and 'A crash course in macro accounting'.

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCIII)

 

“Some fields work in theory but not in practice. Some fields work in practice but not theory. The uniqueness of economics is that it works in neither theory nor practice.” (Nassim Taleb)

Science works in theory AND practice: “Research is, in fact, a continuous discussion of the…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Related 'Neo-Paleo-Stupidicism' 

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCII)

“Violence and oppression must be considered a critical factor for capitalisms survival. You left the concept of structural violence out of your equation.” (DecentraliseEverything)

From the beginning, economists didn't get the difference between science/politics and…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

“The problem is distribution. But we can't address that without acknowledging what deficit really is.” (DecentraliseEverything)

You are light-years behind the curve. Learn to read and read my post

MMT: Distribution is the drawback NOT Inflationhttps://t.co/bN9m3BqFC1

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Occasional X: Clueless economists / Science (CCCI)

 

“Modern Monetary Theory #mmt is a seductive economic theory that's making the rounds around the world. It was popularized by Stephanie Kelton …” (Emmanuel Maggiori, quoted by Douglas Padgett)

There is no such thing as MMT's Private Sector, but only the household sector and the… pic.twitter.com/AI1G12TeUj

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 2, 2026

Related 'MMT: NO sound scientific foundations' and 'The final implosion of MMT'

The posts are from 2017/2016. The time between MMT's unassailable refutation and its abolishment is a metric for economists' stupidity/corruption. Actually, MMT's precursors have already been provably false.

Strictly speaking, economics violates scientific standards since the founding fathers.

“In economics we should strive to proceed, wherever we can, exactly according to the standards of the other, more advanced, sciences, where it is not possible, once an issue has been decided, to continue to write about it as if nothing had happened.” (Morgenstern, 1941)

Occasional X: The futile attempt to recycle Kalecki (XIII)

Kalecki got macroeconomics wrong. Here is DeepSeek's rectification of Grok:

Conclusionhttps://t.co/yHkmjwXcKm

This amounts to a refutation of legacy economics in general and Kalecki's approach, in particular.

For all methodological details about Kalecki's failure, see the…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 1, 2026

Occasional X: The foul spirit of political economics (CCLXXXIX)

“The world is better in many ways, …” (Per Bylund)

True. Artificial Intelligence now conducts a logically far superior economics discussion than economists in general and Per Bylund in particular.

This is what DeepSeek concludes: “The AXEC refutation therefore stands as a…

— AXEC (@EgmontHandtke) May 1, 2026