… it establishes that consumption is the cause of economic growth, and the issue of production is ignored.
… it tries to measure average price for a basket of goods, when the basket is arbitrary and can change at will.
… it looks at society’s method of resource distribution, while neglecting the individual.
… it tries to model human action for everyone, without the use of godly magic.
… it says that costs determine prices.
Add on!
It holds that labor alone determines value.
It holds that government flunkies are better at running your life than you are.
it espouses the iron law of wages
inflation is assumed to decrease unemployment
I don’t see the problem with this, moreover Austrian economics also does.
Well, mainstream economics doesn’t model human action, that’s part of the Austrian criticism.
From the perspective of the individual firm that’s somewhat true.
Almost nobody believes that anymore…
I don’t see how that’s relevant.
It’s not really, I just found it an odd choice.
Anyway to answer the OP, what I find particularly silly is the notion of a giffen good, amongst others, of course.
In the short run it does, and it the long run most mainstream economists accept that it doesn’t.
Not really, in the long run it’s often granted that consumption does not matter.
It’s part of a stupid economic theory. So…
I don’t see that it’s odd at all for a choice. After all: some people still believe it–explicitly and implicitly, e.g. anyone who talks about capitalism being exploitative of the workers for not giving them the full value of the product, wage slavery, etc.
It depends on the definition of capitalism.
…when it assumes that to have more of something, you have to consume it.
The Rev
The right one vs all of the wrong ones.
… when it admits that too much consumption and too much borrowing caused the economic crisis and prescribes more consumption and more borrowing as the remedy.
Except Mr1001Lies and his legion of mindless drones.
…when it says that people cannot afford education or health care, and therefore should be forced to pay for education or health care through the public sector
Economics doesn’t say anyone should do anything.
Right, but who cares about a few losers on youtube.
When it claims that all knowledge regarding economic reality can only be discovered through empirical observation, not realizing that the claim itself is inherently contradictory.
When it’s based on the writings of J.M. Keynes.