this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2026
604 points (97.2% liked)

Science Memes

18300 readers
1537 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Riverside@reddthat.com 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I commend your appreciation of the field as a science, but you should also acknowledge that 80% of what's currently taught in the academia about economics is just wrong. Supply and demand (unfalsifiable and shitty predictive capabilities compared to the falsifiable and empirically proven labour theory of value) is just one example in the long list of econ-101 bullshit.

Regardless, as an appreciator of economics, have you checked out econophysics? The study of economics as a thermodynamical system. It's wonderful, with predictive capabilities on for example salary distributions in capitalist economies, Paul Cockshott has a book and a few introductory videos on his YouTube channel

[–] Meron35@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago

No need to convince me of Econ 101 BS, economists themselves are well aware of it since at least the 1980s. That's why basically every unit of Econ above the 101 level shits on it, and any good Econ 101 shits on itself.

As a general rule of thumb, anything in economics before 1970 basically ran on vibes due to lack of data. Unfortunately, current day undergrad Econ 101 lags at least 20 years behind the current consensus.

That's why the Card, Angrist, and Imbens paper was such a big deal. They used (natural) experimental data, and found out that using Econ 101 supply and demand to study the labour market doesn't work. That's why there's an entire field called labour economics, which is only taught at the graduate level.

Most policymakers probably only learnt Econ 101 maybe 4 decades ago, so they're impression of Econ is probably six decades out of date.

The Death of “Econ 101” - https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2022/10/the-death-of-econ-101