They all establish testable hypotheses which can be evaluated with data.
The catch is in the conclusions. Neoliberals telling us that smoking won't cause cancer, climate change is fixable with a new widget, and "Head On! Apply directly to the Forehead!" is good medical advice do not somehow invalidate centuries of accumulated research and data collection to the contrary by rendering their fields invalid.
Invisible hand line go up trickle down isn't the only form of economics. Marxian economics exists as a field. if you want to drag orthodoxy, why don't you say neoclassical economics is a religion?
to hazard a guess, neoliberalism is so dominant in western politics, media, and academia that normal people have no reason to make distinctions between franchises.
They all establish testable hypotheses which can be evaluated with data.
The catch is in the conclusions. Neoliberals telling us that smoking won't cause cancer, climate change is fixable with a new widget, and "Head On! Apply directly to the Forehead!" is good medical advice do not somehow invalidate centuries of accumulated research and data collection to the contrary by rendering their fields invalid.
is not
Invisible hand line go up trickle down isn't the only form of economics. Marxian economics exists as a field. if you want to drag orthodoxy, why don't you say neoclassical economics is a religion?
idk I specified, ask the other user.
to hazard a guess, neoliberalism is so dominant in western politics, media, and academia that normal people have no reason to make distinctions between franchises.