http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2012/01/27/mysteries-of-macro/ Models.Behaving.Badly Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:10:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2012/01/27/mysteries-of-macro/#comment-258 LA2.0 Tue, 07 Feb 2012 11:19:31 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=686#comment-258 Why is 1. often considered reprehensible and unfair ? This is an example of double think, it viewed as unfair (since many Chinese are effectively slaves - like the ones working in factories on site woken up at midnight because Apple wants to change a screw size). But we love to buy the products cheaply and enjoy a better 'quality of the physical' life than our parents. But this is a fools game long term. Why is 1. often considered reprehensible and unfair ? This is an example of double think, it viewed as unfair (since many Chinese are effectively slaves – like the ones working in factories on site woken up at midnight because Apple wants to change a screw size). But we love to buy the products cheaply and enjoy a better ‘quality of the physical’ life than our parents. But this is a fools game long term.

]]> http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2012/01/27/mysteries-of-macro/#comment-253 sleepydozey Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:21:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=686#comment-253 Brilliant! Economics of course is not science, it is merely posturing by ideologues on behalf of vested interests. Agree with Krugman that the Austerians are outta their minds? That is merely agreeing that demand should be inflated to provide jobs for the working classes. But inflation is bad for creditors, for the interests of capital, who care not a jot about the unemployed. Austerity, even deflation is good ... if you're a net creditor, a money man. Read Murray Rothbard's histories of panics and depressions in the 19th century and the painstaking presentation of the various ideological viewpoints (surprisingly presented without any editorializing by Rothbard) and the conflict between the hard money and soft money interests. Are we not having the same arguments today? The language is a little different, the concepts are a bit fancier. But there is nothing essentially different. Where is the progress? Brilliant!
Economics of course is not science, it is merely posturing by ideologues on behalf of vested interests.
Agree with Krugman that the Austerians are outta their minds? That is merely agreeing that demand should be inflated to provide jobs for the working classes. But inflation is bad for creditors, for the interests of capital, who care not a jot about the unemployed. Austerity, even deflation is good … if you’re a net creditor, a money man.
Read Murray Rothbard’s histories of panics and depressions in the 19th century and the painstaking presentation of the various ideological viewpoints (surprisingly presented without any editorializing by Rothbard) and the conflict between the hard money and soft money interests. Are we not having the same arguments today? The language is a little different, the concepts are a bit fancier. But there is nothing essentially different. Where is the progress?

]]>