Why do non-economists see it fit to mess with economics?

A former co-worker retweeted the following, which got me riled up:

Ninoy was murdered on August 21, 1983, not August 20 or August 23. That's what happens with stupid policies such as holiday-economics.

So I posted the following retort:

Oh, sure. Poke fun at GMA's expense now that she's no longer President. Where were your wisecracks when she was doing the country good?

Noynoy is a hypocrite, a liar and a panderer; the only thing sadder is the fact that all the other candidates were worse.

And, please, don't get me started on Nognog.

Does no one else remember when Noynoy declared that he wouldn't run for President, fearing that it'd look like he was taking advantage of his mother's then-recent death? Then reneged on something he pretty much swore to, and ran, anyway?

So far, 'P-Noy' has done nothing but pander to the masses, who couldn't see past the tip of their noses and realize that the country's in much better shape than it was before P-GMA took office. Sure, we've had some bad times, but do you realize that the Philippines was one of the few Asian countries that managed to ride the storm that was the economic recession only a few months past (the effects of which are still felt pretty much everywhere).

Simple picture, for those who find my claim that the country is doing better: I remember when the restaurant Chef d'Angelo first opened in the Padre Faura wing of Robison's Place Ermita. They were pretty much confined to serving suit-wearing yuppies. A few months ago, The Wife and I were at a mall where a Chef d'Angelo recently opened. I wanted to try out their food (having never done so before), which I could now afford to do.

The one thing that struck me was how the customers in the store were as varied as, say, that of a Jollibee branch. There were a couple of kids who couldn't be past college, a family of five eating out (and they weren't a high-middle-class looking family, either), a couple who (sorry, but true) definitely didn't look like they belonged, amongst others. Even saw a couple of suit-wearing yuppies.

Now, it could be that Jollibee's prices have reached the point were it's just as expensive to eat there as in Chef d'Angelo; it could also easily be the case that Chef d'Angelo recently lowered their prices to the point where even traditionally Jollibee-eating people could afford them.

Either way, that means our economy has improved from the time I first saw a Chef d'Angelo restaurant, to when I actually got to eat there.

Consider: If Jollibee has really become that expensive, the fact that people still eat there in droves mean that Filipinos can still afford to do so. If, instead, Chef d'Angelo's prices have dropped, it means the management thinks they can afford to do so to compete, and still make profit.

In any case, I know that former President Arroyo's "holiday economics" worked, before I sure saw a helluva lot of people in malls and similar places during extended weekends, spending money buying goods, or partaking in other services, rather than staying at home. If nobody could afford to do that, then why were so many, in fact, doing it?