When I studied economics I was taught that it is politics, pure and simple.
Sure seems like it.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
You mean like this Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences - Wikipedia
Only been awarded for the last 50 years.
Samuelson was on the "Index Liborum Prohiborum" on the Midway.
Merton Miller rhetorically addressed one of our first finance classes: "Why are you here?"....and he answered "Because you didn't get into Harvard."
BTW there was an article in the most recent issue of "The Journal of Political Economy" which untangled the role of proactive government spending -- the authors demonstrate that the "multiplier" is most often less than one.
I only subscribe to two eco journals these days -- JPE is#1 and Journal of Law and Economics #2
Angus Deaton's book, (2015 Nobel in Eco, book now in paperback) :"The Great Escape" highly recommended.
Last edited:
Is economics a science? Maybe that is the problem: it thinks it is a science so it tries to behave like a science and make numerical predictions.leadbelly said:
The only thing the Laffer story shows is that some politicians believe economics is a science - or maybe they are hoping that the public believe this, while the politicians use economics as a cover for doing what they always wanted to do anyway.
Is it a theory? I would call it a postulate. A theory needs to have some substance behind it, even if it eventually turns out to be wrong.
Economy actually has 2 origins. Economy developed in parallel in 2 types of societies.
- Matriarchal (imaginary) economy appeared in plain patriarchal societies, being most transactions about hunting and collection of renewable natural resources. Coins were made of commonly available materials, representing just the cost of producing the coins and protecting the system. Prices were variable. Bargaining was common. Interest in loans was allowed. Arbitrary amounts of money were put into circulation and given to supporters to keep the system in power. Arbitrary production of money was acting as the bonding element for system supporters.
- Patriarchal (real) economy appeared in plain matriarchal societies, being most transactions about agriculture and livestock. Coins were made of precious metals, representing a physically fixed value, apart from the cost of producing the coins. Prices were fixed. Bargaining was banned. Interest in loans was punished with death or deportation. Amounts of money put into circulation were depending of aging of coins and finding of new precious metal mining sites. A power structure was only required to protect precious metal reserves. The concept of "precious metal" (a metal with many figures of merit) was the bonding element for system supporters.
Expressing price of things as a single integer number is a simplification equating the modulus of the value vector. In the long term bi-dimensional money could be implemented to solve the problem. Economy is a bi-dimensional computational problem.
Depending on world region, the root of economy can be matriarchal or patriarchal. At present, the problem is that both types of economy cannot be directly joined, not to mention joined by force.
However, with the help of math, a list of banned operations and maintenance tasks can be determined, to make both systems compatible. Glass-Steagall law was aimed in that direction, making US economy compatible between different states, and with economy of other countries. Compatibility was lost when that law was cancelled.
On the other hand, can a mathematically derived law be really cancelled? Isn't that a brute force attempt to approximate exponential with sine?
btw: Gender conflict is the major obstacle to derive the mathematical model of economy. Gender conflict disrupts the perception of one of the two dimensions of value vector.
- Matriarchal (imaginary) economy appeared in plain patriarchal societies, being most transactions about hunting and collection of renewable natural resources. Coins were made of commonly available materials, representing just the cost of producing the coins and protecting the system. Prices were variable. Bargaining was common. Interest in loans was allowed. Arbitrary amounts of money were put into circulation and given to supporters to keep the system in power. Arbitrary production of money was acting as the bonding element for system supporters.
- Patriarchal (real) economy appeared in plain matriarchal societies, being most transactions about agriculture and livestock. Coins were made of precious metals, representing a physically fixed value, apart from the cost of producing the coins. Prices were fixed. Bargaining was banned. Interest in loans was punished with death or deportation. Amounts of money put into circulation were depending of aging of coins and finding of new precious metal mining sites. A power structure was only required to protect precious metal reserves. The concept of "precious metal" (a metal with many figures of merit) was the bonding element for system supporters.
Expressing price of things as a single integer number is a simplification equating the modulus of the value vector. In the long term bi-dimensional money could be implemented to solve the problem. Economy is a bi-dimensional computational problem.
Depending on world region, the root of economy can be matriarchal or patriarchal. At present, the problem is that both types of economy cannot be directly joined, not to mention joined by force.
However, with the help of math, a list of banned operations and maintenance tasks can be determined, to make both systems compatible. Glass-Steagall law was aimed in that direction, making US economy compatible between different states, and with economy of other countries. Compatibility was lost when that law was cancelled.
On the other hand, can a mathematically derived law be really cancelled? Isn't that a brute force attempt to approximate exponential with sine?
btw: Gender conflict is the major obstacle to derive the mathematical model of economy. Gender conflict disrupts the perception of one of the two dimensions of value vector.
Last edited:
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Exactly, that one.
It´s a Nobel **Memorial* Prize, invented by **a Bank**, to distribute among Economists financed by other Banks, in an attempt to make the masses believe Economy is a Science, which it is not, and even less the kind they "prize", which just rubberstamps and "justifies" the "Empire of the Day" Politics.
Hey, among my customers I have a "Pink Floyd Memorial" cover band, you think they should play live at Pompeii before 400000 people just because of that? Wow, they´ll be delighted!!!
Not my words but Nobel´s own (and his heirs who are *the* incumbent parts in the Fund handling and meaning):
As they say, straight from the mouth of the horse
Figure out the implications of restricting operations with a vector to the modulus of the vector. Rotation is not under control in transactions! But a law applies: The sum of rotations in all operations is constant (it is only that massive rotation in transactions in one region or market can be inducing massive opposite rotation in others).
- Status
- Not open for further replies.