Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
If economics is a science, it is one trying to operate with so many variables it becomes useless.
Well, I used the term loosely. It IS a science, but a "soft" science, like psychology. Rather than predicting definitive outcomes, it predicts trends. And yes, it is far from precise.

One of which is the incompetance of banks.
Actually, it's the incompetence of BANKERS that is the problem, and economic theory can take that into account. It's just not comfortable when you do, so many economists ignore that, preferring to blame the "volatility of the market."

It is armchair thinking, and much more political ideology than logic or knowledge.
In large part it's a combination of all of these. Which makes it very easy to misuse.

In fact, nothing but a lot more control of this wild capitalism will save another crisis, and another.
I disagree. Removing the controls of capitalism would work far better, I think. Tighten the controls on monopolies, of course, and strengthen consumer protections, but let the markets work. A competitive marketplace has always been beneficial to both industry and consumers. Adding regulations which make it impossible for innovators to break into the marketplace only makes things worse.

The news on our tv was that if Obama and senate/rep had not made this temporary compromise, US would have had to stop paying its officials and vital functions within a very short time.
Doubtful. A good reason not to put to much stock into TV news. NON-vital functions might have had to be stopped, temporarily, which would not have been good for those government workers, but no way they would let the vital functions shut down.