Leaderboard

I'm gonna shoot from the hip here, and declare war on some of these overused military metaphors. Let's drive them out of their foxholes, and mow them down with a rapid fire of literal sentences that express exact ideas. And, after that initial salvo, let's put some boots on the ground and aim for the overused metaphor's ideological ally, the cliché (phrases like "there are not guarantees in life", "play an honest game in life" are the foot-soldiers of the enemy known as intellectual laziness).

Your faith in this system as well as the difficulty you have in seeing any validity on the other side stem from this mistaken belief that any macroeconomic systems are "empirically testable." By their nature, a controlled, let alone a blind or double blind study is completely impossible. At best you may draw conclusions from similar circumstances in similar countries and at worst you may draw your conclusions from computer simulations, but neither of those imparts anything close to the scientific certainty you pretend at or even attempt to answer for the massive opportunity cost lost in each signature on a US presidents desk. You don't lack a 200 level economics class as much as a class on critical thinking or even a decent book. To make the claims about our current economic model(note the word model) as though it were facts that you are dealing out is to equate alchemy with chemistry and religion with philosophy. It's not in the same realm as science. At best it is an art that might one day lead to an actual scientific understanding of economics but it is certainly not that now. This is why Ayn Rand and Objectivists generally do not argue against your paradigm on empirical grounds but only on the moral terms.