Hacker News Reader

Not if you ask marxist-economists...

Yes, and we should ask Lysenkoists about effective growing of crops.

Marx contributed massively to sociology. He contributed nothing of note to economics that's really relevant to this day (not that his effort was not commendable). Sticking to orthodox marxist economics in 2016 is more dogma than science.

Marx's contributions to sociology are definitely relevant today, even if they're not in vogue. Even if they're wrong. This is human behavior we're talking about, and people have memories that they act upon.

That wasn't the point. The point is that the "laws" of economics are the same rigorous laws of physics.

Markets aren't forces of nature. That's propaganda.

Citing economic theory that has been discredited as evidence that economics is not a science makes about as much sense as citing Ptolemy's Geocentric model as evidence that astronomy isn't a science.

Again. No one need to prove that economics isn't the same kind of science as physics. so that guy made a bad analogy. don't care.

And if you ask biblical literalists, they'll tell you that there was no big bang but the world was instead created in six days. There are always some people with counterfactual beliefs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com