Episode 150: How Economic Jargon and Cliches Make Cruel, Anti-Poor Policies Sound Sterile and Science-y (Part I)
\u201cSupply and demand.\u201d \u201cIt\u2019s just Econ 101.\u201d \u201cMost economists agree...\u201d \u201cThere\u2019s always trade offs.\u201d \xa0 Over and over, media and policymakers spew the same tired recitations meant to convey the seemingly natural, immutable laws of economics. "The economy," we\u2019re told, is thriving when business owners and job creators are making record profits, and failing when investments in social programs have simply grown too high \u2014 and that\u2019s the way it is and will, and should, always be. These terms, phrases and sentiments are part of a lexicon of economic euphemisms, cliches, and other forms of business-school speak designed to blur class lines and convince us that our economic system \u2014 entirely a result of policy choices largely designed to further enrich the wealthy at any the expense of the broader welfare \u2014 is a function of cold, hard science, with rules and principles no more pliable than those of physics or chemistry. \xa0 But why should we be expected to just accept that a news report that \u201cthe economy\u201d is on the upswing means the average worker is doing any better, when all evidence is to the contrary? Why should our media\u2019s economic so-called \u201cexperts\u201d come from a pool of elite economics departments beholden to corporate donors and right-wing think tanks? And why must \u201cthe economy\u201d be defined in terms of whether the Dow is up or down, instead of whether people have food, housing, healthcare, and job security? \xa0 On this episode, part one of a two-part series, we examine the first five of our ten most popular clich\xe9s, jargon, and rhetorical thingamajigs that economists, economic reporters, and pundits use to sanitize, obscure, and provide a thin gloss of Science-ism to what is little more than power-flattering, cruel, racist, austerity ideology. \xa0 Our guest is writer Hadas Thier. \xa0