ON ECONOMISTS: Understand that my dislike for economists has exceptions as there are many in the field who I admire and respect wholeheartedly. My issue with economists is directed to those who treat the subject as a natural science and not as a social science, —1/7

and those who further an economic school of thought by not focusing on what is good economics and what is bad economics but rather on building a following of naive individuals that detest anything that contradicts with their ideology —2/7

who never inquire into other viewpoints and as a result turn economics rather than a tool to improve life and into a religion of dogmatism. — 3/7

You may use empirical evidence to strengthen an argument and pursue a policy to reaffirm its validity — every field uses empirical evidence. Nothing is guaranteed, and to claim a guarantee is foolish. Empirical information is to garner more certainty for the future. —4/7

For example, there’s empirical evidence that if you raise the minimum wage, it generally lowers employment as the cost increase to businesses, especially small businesses who otherwise couldn’t afford to hire the individual. — 5/7

The form of economics I dislike is anything that attempts to predict the outcome of an event, in particular, those economists that work at the Fed, ECB, IMF, or those market strategists and analysts on Wall Street that concoct a fancy proposal as to where the GDP of a — 6/7

country will be next year or a particular stock of a company will be and is vehemently defended with overwhelmingly complex mathematical formulas. What’s worse is when randomness proves these wizards wrong, and they continue to predict until their right—utter foolishness. — 7/7