The fact that it’s possible to acquire knowledge outside of university.

Right, so what is it about this particular individual that lends credibility?

If an economist was writing about computer science, everybody on HN would dismiss it.

Per her bio:

I have a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering and a master’s degree in engineering management, with a focus on engineering economics and financial modeling. I oversee the finances and day-to-day operations of an engineering facility.

I’ve been performing investment research for over fifteen years in various public and private capacities.

So it is a mixture of education and practical experience. Whether that lends weight to her output is up to the reader.

> what is it that lends credence to her writing about economics

The fact that she's not an economist.

Because those economists are just as clueless as everyone else. The fact that inflation targets cannot be met by central banks is considered a mystery so far.

I was waiting for the first gatekeeping comment, and there it is.

What's "gatekeeping" about asking for credentials? Does the fact that she's not an economist also automatically make her an authority on astronomy, medicine, and history, or how does this work...? "No no no, in order to be an authority on astronomy it doesn't help not to be an economist; you need not to be a historian!", or what?