That’s reductive. I’m no economist but it goes like this: there are models that predicts the effects of certain industry changes. The invention of certain technologies at a certain time didn’t fit the prediction and they don’t know why. Someday somebody will figure it out and the model will be better. In the mean time, the model continues to work just fine with other stuff.
ech@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Also known as “being wrong”. Being wrong is fine. It’s great even. It means that there’s more to discover and improve. Calling it a “paradox” is a pathetic, self-serving attempt to save face when presented with evidence that makes them look bad. Instead of saying “We don’t know, but we’re working on it,” they pass it off as unsolvable.
stoly@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Paradox was a word chosen by the journalist for clicks.
Not knowing enough is not the same as being wrong. They are different things.
ech@lemmy.ca 1 month ago
Maybe. Until they start calling this out for the farce it is, I’m gonna blame them as much as the journalists pushing the hype.
stoly@lemmy.world 1 month ago
You’d be helped by learning something about social science rather than rail against it ignorantly. You could then make constructive critiques to improve everything.
Windex007@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I’m angry at social science. Just not about this specifically.