Your statement is obviously founded within classically dogmatic academic thought. What is testable and falsifiable? The irony here is that "science" utilises "empirical rigour" founded upon "The standard model of physics". At "university" you are conditioned to believe that if something cannot be confirmed via "empirical fact" then it is not a valid theoretical model. Here comes the bombshell for you and all akin with your limited perception of causality. "The standard model of physics" has itself never been proven or confirmed by any scientific individual who proclaims it to be the pinnacle of human awareness. Infact, "they" ("scientists") are currently "conducting experiments" underground Switzerland, attempting to locate the mythical higgs boson particle in order to validate the assumption that the standard model is correct. Where does this FACT leave your claims of what is falsifiable, based upon the truth, the truth being that all falsifiable knowledge is based upon an unproven, unconfirmed system?
There are a number of books that suggest greed is a fundamental factor that inhibits a traders propensity to become consistently profitable, and infact, self experience ought to be able to confirm this proposal. Therefore, we can conclude that as traders/people can and do become consistently profitable, greed can be purged from the thinking process therefore directly refuting your statement. .............................................................................................................................. In terms of the management of a large number of people, greed is prevalent within the mind of Mr and Mrs average due to the lack of a balanced distribution of "wealth", offset against the items / pleasures that money can provide. The capitalist philosophy that has brought about this diverse world of pleasures is inaccessible to the vast majority due to the lack of a balanced distribution of "wealth". Therefore we can conclude that greed can be eliminated, if wealth is no longer secularised. How can we manage a large number of people and maintain root level productivity which brings rise to everyday consumer goods that we currently appreciate, whilst continuing to pursue the secularisation of wealth via the pump and dump philosophy of dogmatic economics? Well, the only way to achieve this is to create a population of slaves who are unable to speak out against their dissatisfaction and lack of wealth. We can therefore ask a number of questions; 1) Is a population of slaves an experience that the majority will benefit from or accept? 2) If not, is the secularisation of wealth therefore proven to be misguided in terms of its capacity to serve the interests of the majority? 3) As it is now evidently clear that currenct economic practice continues to create a number of problems that will require "solutions" (which invariably manifest in the removal of civil liberties), can we now categorically state that the continued refusal of academic institutions to accept Austrian economics is itself a byproduct funded by a misguided agenda to create a slave population via the deployment of deflation and hyperinflation as serviced by the dogmatic school of thought? In terms of the bigger picture, mankind must redefine what it is to be wealthy which ultimately leads to a spiritual path of personal expansion, of which when complete, creates the realisation that in order for mankind to solve his/her problems, we must down the tools of exploitation (capitalism in its current form) and begin to nurture a philosophy founded upon co-operation. That is the problem we face and no ammount of Keynesian mathematical models will ever be able to impose this requirement. Albeit imperfect, the Austrian school can therefore be concluded as a superior option in terms of creating a reality whereby the majority can experience liberty and a semblance of wealth. Traders don't become successful by fighting the trend, they become successful by flowing with the trend. Why should the policies of government be any different?