|
|
|
|
|
|
by neokantian
2674 days ago
|
|
|
> Most of the evidence points to the economists abusing assumptions, which is hardly a mathematics problem. Agreed. Economics is about the real world. Therefore, it has to be empirical. That means that axiomatically deriving conclusions from assumptions is not legitimate in economics. Still, in the context of empirical knowledge, we have only two usable methods: the scientific or the historical one. Economics cannot be validated by testing experimentally. Hence, economics cannot possibly rest on a sound method. Therefore, economics is fundamentally not a legitimate academic discipline. |
|
|
We know that hyperinflation is a way to screw over an economy utterly. It can and will fail and in the best case be the equivalent of dissolving the currency and going bankrupt.
The most benign form of it that may not techically count would involve massive growth as well and the devaluation wouldn't be a pathology but a reflection that yes, a well honed spear, flint knives, a badket, and a few carved bone pieces of jewelry may have been respectable wealth for nomadic hunter-gathers but aren't really worth anything compared to even the contents of a jalopy in the great depression.
Just a steel knife or pot would be grand artifacts because they are better in performance than anything else they could find.
That their old currency isn't worth anything is reflective of the fact that past production has been rendered obsolete and the old goods are worth little.