The only problem with this is that they (the economists, themselves) are the only people who really consider themselves to be "experts" and there are a million contradictions between the million of them. Similar to the "scientific" field of psychology, it boarders more on philosophical debate than it does actual, objective facts.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Instead we get the software developer solution. This is akin to altcoins swapping algorithms to stay ahead of ASIC miners. Instead you are changing rewards to stay ahead of bots. People will still be incentivized to game the system and will adjust their methods accordingly.
Posted using Partiko Android
We don't totally disagree, but the solution is apparently not obvious and the problem is very complex, particularly because it (the problem) is rooted, and mostly rests, with human psychology, which, as I alluded earlier, is something we don't fully understand, if at all.
Try to separate microeconomics and macroeconomics. Micro is the scientific approach, which is what we're looking at here i believe. Macro is typically scientism / political bs.