| Max King of the Wild said: Really dude? Economist have formulas and theories from trends and data...They most likely will give you the same answer using their "laws of...." formulas. Also, look at my edit. All the previous increases have had the effects me and badge have said. |
An economist such as you have described is the equivalent of an engineer that uses F = mg to work out the force experienced by the space station, or that uses the formula for air resistance on a sphere to determine the drag on an airplane.
Economics is one of the primary examples of chaos theory. Trends are useless in chaotic systems. The "laws of..." formulas used in economics are all about analysing a single entity or a subset, assuming that all of the rest of the system were going to remain static. This is, of course, an incorrect assumption, but it's useful when trying to analyse what a single company should do when everything remains steady in terms of things like laws. When laws change, the analysis becomes useless.
There's a similar situation in my own field of expertise, which is the mathematical modelling of fluid flow and phase change (another chaotic system, albeit a much smoother one). There are formulas describing equilibrium dynamics - that is, under what circumstances you get everything remaining static. These are useful to find steady states. However, many people apply equilibrium equations to non-equilibrium situations - this is the wrong thing to do, but many do it anyway.
Oh, and for future reference, you need to be careful about your use of "I" and "me". Does this sentence sound sensible? "All the previous increases have had the effects me have said"?
