Ostomy Memories on Economists

In this discussion
Replies
3
Views
378
HenryM

THERE WAS A TIME when I believed that psychiatrists and their little cousins, psychologists, were the most unreliable predictors of the future on the planet. I was dead wrong. The most untrustworthy futurists infecting our daily life are the economists. As far as I’m concerned, the very term economist is just as pejorative a moniker as politician. The fact that the latter group makes decisions based upon the analysis of the former group only exacerbates the situation.
On the TV political talk shows, the most heated arguments occur when they have two economists on simultaneously. These guys are more contentious than mixed martial arts fighters. Their outrage at what they perceive as the false prophecies of the other often leave the show moderators at a loss to control the program.
Economic theories and schools of thought run the gamut from Keynes to Friedman and back again. Some insist that free-market economies never go astray, some that economies may stray occasionally but that any major deviations from the path of prosperity could and should be corrected by the all-powerful Fed. Notwithstanding all the “expert” analysis, our economy still goes off the rails occasionally and has to be righted, while one party’s “experts” struggle toward possible recovery and the other party’s naysayers insist the recovery has been “too slow.” Whatever that means.
One school of economists says the other offers “schlock economics,” while the other group says its disparagers deal in “discredited fairy tales” (e.g. trickle-down economics). But despite whatever predictive rabbits the economists pull out of their hats (or some other place), stuff happens: the limitations of human rationality; institutions run amok; market imperfections that produce sudden, unpredictable crashes; and regulators who don’t regulate.
I’m not sure which is worse: printing more money or producing more economists. No matter where they went to school, their tarot cards still get worn out in short order.

Gray Logo for MeetAnOstoMate

Why Join MeetAnOstoMate?

First off, this is a pretty cool site with 33,093 members. Get inside and you will see.

We're not all about ostomy. Everything is being discussed in the forums.

It's a very special community, embracing all ages and backgrounds. People are honest and truly care.

Privacy is very important - the website has many features that are only visible to members.

Create an account and you will be amazed.

Bill

WARNING: This post may contain political content.

Hello HenryM.
Thank you for another interesting perspective on social dynamics.
My view on psychiatrists and psychologists would be that they don’t generally predict the future but deal with the complexities concerned with the workings of the human mind.
Economists and politicians do seem to have a lot in common and often work in collaboration towards the shared goals of controlling and dominating the rest of the population.
I suppose it is just as well that they evolve with differences of opinion that can be contrasted and compared, so that we may (seemingly) have a choice.
However, in the wider scheme of things, these ‘professional’ people rarely take into consideration things that might be important to ‘ordinary’ people, like values, morals, and detrimental ‘costs’ to the rest of the population.  People who tend to be ignored or written off as irrelevant to those who make money (or otherwise benefit) from the system.
These 'professionals' appear to perceive ‘recovery’ as a state equivalent to the status quo, whereby they (and their cohorts) can carry on exploiting everyone else with impunity.

My perception of ‘recovery’ would not be a desire to go back to how things were, but to evolve into something ‘better’ – for everybody, not just the few who already benefit.

I did write a rhyme on this subject some time ago for the benefit of the ‘victims’ of the system. Although the rhyme was not directed towards economists, the sentiments and principles seem much the same.

Best wishes
Bill

RELEVANT TO RECOVERY

What’s relevant to recovery
Is relevant to me.
This obvious discovery
Is just how it should be.

Let’s think and use some logic
To analyse this theme.
Let us be more specific
And tell of what we mean.

To recover implies returning.
And getting something back.
It’s health for which we’re yearning
Or getting back on track.

Returning to ’my’ normal state
Is not what I would seek.
For ‘normal’ was an awful fate.
Ominous, cursed and bleak.

I wish to stay away from that
Which made me what I am.
Bullies, bastards, cads and rats
Are those from whom I ran.

I don’t need all that gamesmanship
Abuse from head to toe.
Nor poisonous relationships.
They do not help me grow.

I need a safe and peaceful place
A space where I can be.
Loved and liked with warm embrace
And friendly company.

It would be good alongside this
To have someone to trust
When life’s not right and goes amiss
Support is then a ‘must’.

A ‘good’ professional near at hand
Is worth their weight in gold.
As long as they can understand
And listen to what they’re told.

Experience, knowledge and some skill
To help, not hinder me.
I do not want to get more ill
Because ‘they’ cannot see.

I’m not a ‘subject’ to report
On what is bad and wrong
I want ‘appropriate’ support
To help ‘me’ move along.

When chaos and emotion reign
I need a safe abode.
I need to know I can stay sane
When in a crisis mode.

What is my life - I ponder death
When living seems futile.
I try & try with every breath
To make it seem worthwhile.

To recover is to live
And try hard not to die.
It combines the take and give
It gives reason back to why.

I need to stop and think and plan.
To find what works for me
I need to work on who I am
And who I want to be.

I want to change and I will work
To achieve my goal.
I do not wish to go berserk
I need some self- control.

Can you help me in this task?
This is my brief request.
It does not seem like much to ask
It could be your best bequest.

With your power, skills and wealth
And your' prized profession.
You could help my mental health
And help avoid regression.

I want to stay self-organised.
I want complete control.
I want my life more harmonised
In heart and mind and soul.

                                             B. Withers 2007
(IN: Constructive Conversations Inversed 2008)

Gray Logo for MeetAnOstoMate
HenryM

RE shrinks predicting the future:  I'm thinking about when they offer their opinion in court about the relative risks of releasing criminals who have either been found incompetent, or insane.  Sheer guesswork.

Bill

Warning: This post may contain political content.


Hello HenryM.
Thanks for clarifying your previous comments. I do tend to agree that this aspect of their work amounts to 'guesswork'. However, as you say, it is just 'opinion' that they are offering and, as has been pointed out before, opinions can differ between different 'professionals'.
One of the problems with courtroom settings is that the people trying to make reasonable and 'rational' judgements are often sadly lacking in knowledge and experience relating to the people and conditions they are required to make those judgements on.

Professionals in the 'caring' industry like to think that their work makes a positive and successful difference, and tend to present a case in court that supports that viewpoint. They are often short on reliable evidence to back up what they are saying and are willing to give their patients/clients the benefit of any doubt.


There is, of course, a covert pressure on professionals to toe the party line, even when there are no written dictates as to what that line is: On one occasion, after giving ‘evidence’ in court, I was given an official warning by my employers on the grounds that: “The court system is adversarial and, as an employee of the organisation, it was my ‘job’ to put across an organisational perspective” (i.e. leave out anything that did not accord with their perspective).
I subsequently put in a complaint to the judge, pointing out that I had been disciplined because I was being required by my employers to only put one side of the story in court. I also pointed out that I took an oath in court ‘to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth’. Needless to say, I was not popular with my employers, who (after having to try to justify their position to the judge) decided to withdraw the disciplinary notice and reluctantly agree with me that the oath trumped the organisational perspective.


Many people would not recognise or be aware that these types of subtle and not so subtle pressures are being put on witnesses in court to present a biased view.
Being acutely aware of the ‘bullying’ aspect of these systemic pressures, I was not prepared to be ‘bullied’ on this or other occasions. However, it should be said, that the ‘bullying-system’ can be unforgiving when it comes to people who step out of line and speak up for what they believe to be ‘right’. (not a good move for the faint-hearted!)


In my working days, I used to try to present 'odds' rather than predictions. This way, the judges could recognise that any predictions made would be a 'gamble' based on evidential 'likelihood' of outcomes. Occasionally, I would be asked to comment on cases where the arguments for release of dangerous people into the community were not supported by evidence or fact, but on a perspective of perceived professional competence.
These cases take a lot of 'detective-work', to uncover a relatively reliable alternative perspective. Often, the 'systems' have neither the resources nor the motivation or any vested interest to undertake such research. So, what you get is what they are willing to pay for (guesswork).


Best wishes


Bill

All times are GMT - 5 Hours