Ha ha, excellent stuff. Econ 101 is Econ 101 because it is simplistic. It's like saying "Pi is 22/7. This is high-school mathematics, guys". The whole thing is made simple so you can grasp some concepts. You learn the complexity when you progress through the classes.
Realistically then, saying something is Econ 101 is saying that "looking at this without considering any of the subtleties of the situation, we have the following result".
It's a bit paradoxical and self-referential for a list of supposed Falsehoods to be enunciated and to include “Econ-101 is NOT a comprehensive...” as an item... having further reduced economics to an even lesser level of sophistication.
Economics 101, like all Science 101 courses, is simply wrong and doesn't reflect the world except vaguely from afar. Trying to understand the economy through the lens of economy 101 is like trying to launch a rocket to the moon using only Newton's laws of motion.
Successful governments pick economic winners and losers all the time, and don't let chaotic market forces decide if they need an agriculture sector or R&D.
For a simple example of just how misleading econ 101 is, look at the effect of a minimum wage: by all accounts, it slightly increases employment, the very opposite of econ 101's prediction.
I'm gonna say that anyone who throws out something like "people who don't understand supply and demand" likely doesn't understand them past the ultra-simplistic view presented in Econ 101.
Actual Econ 101 would be understanding how setting a price floor on peoples' ability to sell their labor (aka a "minimum wage") is destructive and immoral.
A pretty big nitpick, but the world is infinitely more complex than anything in an 'Econ 101' class would be able to actually explain. 101 level classes often simplify things to the point of uselessness.
Can we please stop repeating this same old attack on economics. Just because economics 101 introduces people to some simplified assumptions does not mean all economics is like that.
That's like saying, well I was reading a programming book about a Ruby and then I laugh at the professor threw the book in his face and said 'One can never make an Operating system with this'.
Honesty, if you truly believe that about economics then you simply have never spent time to actually learn and engage with a wide verity of economics that exists.
Econ 101 covers expected utility, and it's one of the few pieces of useful econ theory. It's like people write these articles without an elementary understanding of the theory which might be able to sensibly explain the situation.
The whole point is that the Econ 101 model is deliberately simplified way beyond reality to be assimilable by people learning the topic for the first time.
reply