The reason someone would be delightful to learn economy because the deception always the problem from some shrewd economist's companies. When dealing with some aspect of business, society market on curve of demand-and-supply graphics, I always know a trembling self-interest would be so oblivious in motion of civilization and almost dashed in a line to reaching ‘the biggest fortune’ as much reticence as the beginning of deceitful environment for some cases in some companies.
The truth is, some people really understood how to conceal their stink by using some passionate talented people outside there to turn them into ‘victimless choice’ and make a clean-up action to ultimately ‘follow the law’ but take creativity to make up a false, stink and savvy way of forging the weakness based on the law. This is why some economists are actually needed in this world. The fundamentals that everyone needs to learn and avoids the deception instead of helping to mount fortune on the shadow of good but sinful company from inside.
It is so valid to say the ambivalence was not so concrete if any experience involved. But the truth is some economist thinks the way of sassy business wasn’t a smell, even odorless, by people who got sacked by the time they were in. It’s obvious to say not everyone is stupid enough to feel the ungracious nasty secrecy in a whimsical attraction and opportunity. And some people were aware the possibility without asking any inquiry before hopping to the real stage of the show. As Mr. Taylor mentioned in his book there are some basic and core questions for a groundwork in economics: What, How, and Who. This triangle always haunts every single time for economist to the failure because they are not a bunch of fortuneteller.
When I was talking about disgrace in a scope of How and Who, I reach some conclusion that a regular contact between these interrogative questions always leads to an impeccable damage of labor market but so rigging moment for the producers’ platform. In doing so, there are some unforgivable mistakes that actually dismiss and even vanish from the eyes of innocence. First of all, the vision: The pursuit of the truth aimed to make a clear strategy at the end. The act of utterly convincing is impossible to be inevitable, and so persuasive and indulging for consumers. But the evidence for economist is completely always to turnover. Good point taken in dealing this circumstantial business circle is unacceptable and a hypocrite. But this is the point to reach The Who (market) and The How (labor market involvement) which are very much absorbed into a blower of deception for money's sake. Some companies don't even bother to be hideous and excluded their subordinates about each quarter's revenue, like walking on the eggshells.
Second of all: The way of overpromising through implausible vision, like educational reason or passionate hobby for people who buy the products would be a drag between the unfortunate buyers and the needy employees who don’t actually know the revelation, for some of them. The vision turns out as a way of profit-making instead of benevolence. This warning would not be programmed to help the Who and the How except the dependence to earning. At the end some companies would see opportunity in faster hiring and easier firing or let their employees take a choice to leave immediately without compensation but experience of undesirable behaviors from companies' profit seeking.
When I learn so far about the economist behavior, I definitely know that law would not probably be made to help the weak in market determination. Some of teen-like companies make a fraud to be as small year revenue as they can due to the tax treatment and asset security. And the current situation would let some apparatus have six hands to stop sighting the scheme, close their ears hearing the truth, and clog some mouth from screaming unfairness. At last the economist has done a change, the awakening of capitalism. And this closure would embark on the fall of law if the government overlooked connection to protect the people beneath the moral turpitude from some bastard economists who peek-a-boo the market and do over the rebound in same way after all.
