Bourgeois economist basically admits that neo-classical economics is pseudoscience.

[Occhidiangela]

It has been my observation that economics tries to be a science. It isn't as good as chemistry on predictions, however.

My understanding is that economists (and, incidentally, meteorologists) have the difficult job of attempting to create models of chaotic systems;

Aye. Part of the fun is that the weather (chaotic system), influences the economic (chaotic system. The other way around? Not so much.

And usually this goal is the goal of western rich people.

That is you, eppie. To about 80% of the population of the planet, you are Western Rich. This Bud's for you, and this economy is for you. Cheers.

(I am not an economist and don't read much literature so it might be that some nice work has been done on this)

That is obvious.

Nothing went wrong - booms and busts are an INHERENT feature of the capitalist system, as Marx accurately observed some 150 years ago.

And of non-capitalist systems based in agrarian economies. Weather has an influence on that, as does disease, and much else.

I don't think you have the first clue about economists or about climate scientists. You see what you want to see, and ignore the rest. -Jester

QFT

Woe is me, that was the ultimate rebuttal right there! Yep, I see the light now

Not lately.

You just equated the factual status of your opinion on neoclassical economics with the earth's orbit of the sun.
-Jester

No evidence of that poster listening to others, now not even to self. Broadcast mode only.

Maybe there's a nice band he'll listen to. Mojo Nixon, maybe?