You seem adamant to discredit specific examples of consensus when there are plenty of examples. Go down the list on IGM and find another one if you wish.
I'm not here to criticize Chang's works, I'm here to criticize the article, which focuses on critiques of economics in general. Those critiques seem to fall into two categories:
1. economists have political schools of thought and disagree on many things
2. economists assume that people are rational
I do not think that these are valid reasons to disregard economics as an area of research and I have responded to these points as much I am willing to do so. I am concerned that many people (such as those that you can see all over in this comment section) have an agenda of discrediting economics in order to support their own political agenda when the facts disagree with their agenda. An example of this when people advocate that lowering taxes will raise revenues. This is not a political difference, this is a disagreement with well researched observations about the world.
I am here to point out that there are factual sides of economics where we have high consensus, and discussions around economics should take this into account, just like when any other area of research is discussed. There is a point to observing the world, discussions can be grounded in evidence, and wrong opinions exist.
I'm not here to criticize Chang's works, I'm here to criticize the article, which focuses on critiques of economics in general. Those critiques seem to fall into two categories:
1. economists have political schools of thought and disagree on many things
2. economists assume that people are rational
I do not think that these are valid reasons to disregard economics as an area of research and I have responded to these points as much I am willing to do so. I am concerned that many people (such as those that you can see all over in this comment section) have an agenda of discrediting economics in order to support their own political agenda when the facts disagree with their agenda. An example of this when people advocate that lowering taxes will raise revenues. This is not a political difference, this is a disagreement with well researched observations about the world.
I am here to point out that there are factual sides of economics where we have high consensus, and discussions around economics should take this into account, just like when any other area of research is discussed. There is a point to observing the world, discussions can be grounded in evidence, and wrong opinions exist.