Media relations circa 1990. Most people want to be in the media. Not wanting to be on television gives someone like DJT quite a bit of power relative to those who could not bear losing such exposure.
Media relations circa 1990. Most people want to be in the media. Not wanting to be on television gives someone like DJT quite a bit of power relative to those who could not bear losing such exposure.
Once someone gets Say’s Law, the reality of what is going on in an economy becomes so obvious that it is impossible to go back to the pallid and utterly inadquate nonsense that passes for modern theory. The following is a letter I received the other day from someone I have been corresponding with for a while, and after that is my reply to him.
Hope you are well. Yes I read (and watched) all you have given me. [I even read (and bought) your conversation with Gregoire Canlorbe ‘Say’s Law, between Classical, Keynesian and Austrian Interpretations (2016)’ (from De Gruyter)].
I read your ‘200 years of Say’s Law (2003)’. Another thought provoking gem.
Back in the early 2000s I undertook 3 and a half years of bible college. I learnt the importance of hermeneutics and exegesis. Today, I am not surprised Economics scholars also struggle with proper interpretation of another author and can fall into eisegesis. The four scholars, arguing against Say’s Law, could only attack the many straw men (eg. ‘supply creates its own demand’, or Say’s economy is barter-only economy, or Say’s Equality, or change Savings’ definition) and reduce its meaning, or, read something of Say’s Law which wasn’t really there and added their own meaning (eisegesis). Misinterpreting is common, unfortunately, across disciplines as you well know. Let me illustrate my two theological favourites, however. If you can you find anywhere in the bible where it says “Money is the root of all evil” or “The truth will set you free” I will happily give you/anyone $15,000 cash and clean one’s house for a year! The point is: if we omit the few words before these popular phrases then the originator’s point is changed and COMPLETELY lost. Sound familiar?
In the tradition of Hayek’s name calling of some scholars to be ‘quasi-scientific’ (p 20) I thought I could respectively/humbly/comically generally refer to those ‘against’ Say’s Law as:
1. ‘One-side of the ledger Economists’: Aggregate Demand (and full employment) is their God, and ignoring the complexity of the supply side is welcome by their herd. Not sure why some Economists think they can ignore one side of a transaction when professional Accountants get fired for it.
2. ‘Unsustainable-loving Economists’: They are at peace to see government spending on unproductive consumption even if it alters the dynamics of the economy and reduces its viability to stand on its own feet.
3. ‘Second-rate Economists’: It is written “All things are [permissible], but not all things are beneficial” Amplified version. Maybe most complacently see policies in action and gravitate to think that must be the best option. Just because a policy is enacted doesn’t mean it is the most beneficial. Most don’t stand for a strong economic view- so they fall for any.
4. ‘Ignore the opportunity-cost-type of Economists’
5. ‘Short term-ism Economists’
6. ‘I missed school that day they taught ‘the cause-and-effect principle’ Economists’ (or ‘Symptom-is-a-cause Economists’)
7. ‘Blinker Economists’: They focus on only that scope of economic activity which supports their limited explanation.
8. ‘Soft-love loving Economists’… as opposed to hard-love=real love (but you get the idea).
I asked my successful business owner brother-in-law how much he has in idle cash (hoard). He answered it was a lot less than 1% because “you try to put all your money to the best use in every way”. I’m sure if I asked my trader friends what makes them buy and sell a specific trade I am sure they would respond “there is always a reason” rather than Littleboy’s reference of Keynes’ “…people, typically investors, spontaneously change their mind…” (p 160). Ask any banker what they do with savings deposits and they definitely do not lay waste any dime above the ratio reserve law. And I remember asking a wealthy person once as to what keeps him going? The context was why he wants to keep making more and more money. I will never forget his response. “Choices! I can choose to work when I want, or not work when I want” was his reply. Not sure why Keen says capitalists build up money for the sake of it. There is always a reason and it eventually comes back to enriching their lifestyle in some way – whether buying larger home, braces on kids’ teeth, buy another business, securing their wealth/freedom more concretely etc. Lifestyle is the end- not money. Finally, I have been working in the financial sector for the last 4 years. Not sure why this sector is the leakage from the expenditure/circular flow model. We are all charging fees and employed and spending our incomes… maybe we can add ‘Different planet Economists’ to the above list.
Recently I threw a simple question at my demand-worshipping colleagues: “Name one thing you can spend money on that hasn’t been produced?”. They could only resort to the usual retorts: “you have weird economic ideas” preceded by “spending will always be the driver of the economy”.
I am now off to read your 3rd edition Free Market Economics. I only read about half of the 2nd edition nearly a year ago preparing for my anti-Keynesian essay. I have read a quarter of Smith’s Wealth of Nations, but, you are right, these can be difficult to read- I need a break.
All the best Steve and thanks for a wonderful discourse. I am still totally addicted to this issue. Chat soon.
This was my reply.
That is the most original and possibly insightful non-strictly-economic explanation of Say’s Law I have ever come across. Looking at Say’s Law within the framework of the theory of knowledge is something I do not think I have come across before and may never have been previously done. Also not having come across eisegesis before (and neither has my spell check apparently) I can only emphasise that it is a very useful conceptual distinction that really does help get to the heart of the issue. I, of course, share your frustrations in trying to make others even become aware of the problem. When you ask them to name a product they have bought that had not already been produced (which naturally implies a very lengthy structure of production that must go back a considerable distance in both time and space) the only reaction you are likely to get is that even if they don’t know the answer themselves, someone else does because how could it be possible that you have asked something so penetrating that the entire company of modern economists have no answer for. But they don’t have an answer other than to say that buying something will mean that a replacement item will have to be produced to put on the shelf so it will encourage more production. Except that this new order, if there is a new order, can only be filled if the producer had already made the decision to produce this additional replacement item long before you bought what you bought. But for them to go there would mean they had already seen the problem and understood that it is not demand that causes the supply, but that supply is created in anticipation of some future demand. So you will just have to keep teasing them just for your own satisfaction but do not be surprised if the scales fail to fall from their eyes anytime soon (I hope I have not mis-used the metaphor).
I also found your classification system astonishing and accurate. It is also funny but finding it so on the money, its ironical intent seems more serious than anything. The list truly does begin with the implied words, “Look stupid . . .” but where you go from there I do not know. Well actually, where you go is you write this up in some more polished form and try to get it published. There is no Journal of Irony and Economics but I would not want you to mess with the vision you have shown here or try to diminish your satirical intent. You should just expand what you have written and see what follows.
Anyway, we can discuss when you come to visit which you MUST do if you have the time. I will also pass on a copy of my Economics for Infants discussed here on my blog:
As I mention, it is the only children’s book that incorporates Say’s Law, which is indeed an actual feature of the text and the fantastic picture that comes with it.
I do look forward to catching up, but as a kind of cautionary note before we meet I will just say that we had a School retreat the other day where at the dinner we were asked to come as our favourite literary character and I came as the much maligned and mis-understood Edward Casaubon.
With kindest best wishes
This is from Paul Mirengoff at Powerline whose views I tend to shy from for reasons such as this at the start of his post:
Over the years, I’ve probably learned as much, if not more, from George Will as from any columnist or political commentator. These days, his antipathy towards the U.S. president far exceeds mine, but I continue to learn from Will.
Not quite a #NeverTrumper but close, but here he enters some new territory, even seeing Trump’s point. Will has described Trump as the worst president in history because he had supported Roy Moore for the Senate in Alabama. This is what Mirengoff writes:
Will cites nothing in Trump’s presidency remotely comparable to the failings of the Johnson and Buchanan presidencies. Rather, as noted, he relies almost entirely on the Roy Moore endorsement.
Will calls Moore a “credibly accused child molester.” These are weasel words.
What does it mean to be “credibly accused” of misconduct that allegedly occurred 38 years ago with no witnesses other than the accuser and the accused? It means that the accusation is not a physical impossibility or contradictory on its face and that it can’t be disproved (because it happened 38 years ago and there were no witnesses). That’s all.
A credible accusation is not necessarily a true accusation. It is an accusation that can be believed or disbelieved. If all of my witnesses who gave credible testimony had been believed, I would never have lost a case.
Bill Clinton was truthfully accused of sexual misconduct while in office and credibly accused of rape. Under Will’s analysis — divorced as it from substantive presidential policy — why would Trump’s endorsement of Moore support a claim that Trump is a worse president than Clinton?
Will cites “the Everest of evidence” against Moore. But nearly all of that mountain consists of evidence that Moore dated teenagers. That’s bad form, but not criminality. Will makes no attempt to show that it should disqualify Moore from holding public office.
Trump Derangement Syndrome is indeed a form of madness. No one was more against everything Obama did and stood for, and there is a case for choosing him as the worst president ever, but all of it is based on policy decisions, such as his traitorous attempts to undermine the United States with pallets full of cash for the Iranian mullahs and much much else. But for Trump to make an effort to see a Republican senator elected in Alabama whom he didn’t choose and had actively opposed the nomination is about as straightforward a decision for the leader of a party with an agenda to achieve as ought ever to be made. The anti-Trumpers truly are insane.
Front page top story at Drudge: Dustin Hoffman Accused of Exposing Himself to a Minor, Assaulting Two Women. Here is the key sentence:
Thomas was 16 years old and a high-school classmate of Hoffman’s daughter Karina at the United Nations International School in New York when she met the actor in 1980.
Two contrasting views from the comments:
Both stories read like a scripted play. Taking chances, by being caught because other people were close or at the scene, would be foolish. Hoffman is no fool or pervert,or thrill seeker, the ME2 crowd has room for more accusers and I think it is more contrived stories. Fame and fortune make people lie and defame others because their personalities are lacking. One shark attacks and then barracudas move in. A feeding frenzy is all, it is. My Opinion.
Too many accusers for this to be untrue. He’s 80. Time to fade away, never to be seen or heard from ever again.
With one more added detail from the story:
Thomas didn’t share the story of her encounter with Hoffman until seven years after it allegedly occurred, when her daughter was born. She told a family member — who confirmed to Variety having heard the story some time in the 1980s — and several close friends.
Might actually mention that the original headline at Drudge was “DUSTIN HOFFMAN’S 16-YEAR-OLD ACCUSER”. In fact, since she was 16 in 1980, she is actually Dustin Hoffman’s 53-Year-Old accuser but for some reason that is not how the story is being played.
All of which, for some reason, brings this to mind: 13 Alien Encounters That Will Make You Believe. As the subtitle says, “the truth is out there”.
It’s from The Washington Post and it is posted purely because they think it’s funny, someone from a different age trying to bring Christian morality into the governance of the United States. Roy Moore turns refusal to concede into religious crusade: ‘Immorality sweeps over the land’. This no longer has resonance with the largest part of the population of the United States.
“We are indeed in a struggle to preserve our republic, our civilization and our religion and to set free a suffering humanity,” Moore said. “Today, we no longer recognize the universal truth that God is the author of our life and liberty. Abortion, sodomy and materialism have taken the place of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” . . .
“We have stopped prayer in our schools,” Moore said in his statement. “We have killed over 60 million of our unborn children. We have redefined marriage and destroyed the basis of family, which is the building block of our country. Our borders are not secure. Our economy is faltering under an enormous national debt. We have a huge drug problem. We have even begun to recognize the right of a man to claim to be a woman, and vice versa. We have allowed Judges and justices to rule over our Constitution, and we have become slaves to their tyranny. Immorality sweeps over our land.” . . .
“Even our political process has been affected with baseless and false allegations, which have become more relevant than the issues which affect our country,” Moore said. “This election was tainted by over $50 million dollars from outside groups who want to retain power and their corrupt ideology.”
This statement is dead to most Americans, particularly among those who manage the American Republic, the supposedly educated elites who represent no moral virtue of any recognisable kind. Their system of beliefs is a marriage of Marxist ideology with a pretend Christian charity that is nothing other than a means to power without principle or justice.
And if you would like to see the contrast, the world we now inhabit, read the comments thread on this article, with the “viewing option” set to Most Liked First. I have listed a number from the most liked down and placed one of the comments in bold since it is particularly sickening.
No one cares what you think. You are the immorality sweeping over our land and the fact that you do it under the cover of being a god fearing man makes it even more reprehensible.
That’s the way these scum operate. Go read the story in this paper about the Kentucky rep who shot himself today after it was discovered he molested a 17-year-old friend of his daughters who was sleeping over. His suicide note is full of bible-thumping, holy-rolling garbage. It’s pretty clear now that the louder they proclaim how pious they are, the bigger the perv they are.
he was also an outright racist.
These folks were never religious/pious to begin with. They just use religion to browbeat, force, and indoctrinate others into following whatever they say. Religion to them is simply tool to take advantage of others. “Do this, because God says so. Give me more money, because God will reward you. Vote for me, because it is God’s will.” There are some really good religious folks out there. But they don’t go around “wearing their religion on their sleeves”. Even their own bible says not to trust folks who do so (Matthew 6:1-8, 16-18). Yet Republicans always, almost without exception, wear their religion on their sleeve. TL;DR: Wearing your religion in your sleeves is as trustworthy as when Trump constantly says “trust me” whenever he’s obviously lying to you.
Yes. I consider myself a devout Christian and try to live my faith as best I can (though imperfectly). Moore makes me think of this warning from Jesus: “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” Fellow travelers, let us not be deceived. Extremists like Moore tarnish an entire faith, but I am grateful for those who see through this and avoid sweeping generalizations when it comes to Christianity or any faith tradition.
Be damned if I am going to be lectured on morality and godliness by a child molester …
We need to give Roy Moore credit when he’s right. “Immorality sweeps over our land.” That statement is true. Forty-eight percent of Alabamians voted to send a child molester to the Senate. That’s immoral. Felons in prisons have better ethics, they hate child molesters. Obviously more than white evangelical Christians in Alabama. Our Republican Senate thinks it is far more important to give billions of dollars in tax breaks to their wealthiest donors than provide healthcare for poor children. That’s immoral. We have a self-proclaimed serial sexual predator and ogler of naked teenagers elected to the Presidency. That’s immoral. We have committed $700 billion to spend on the military, but can’t find the money to provide healthcare for all of our citizens. That’s immoral. I could go on. But, Roy Moore doesn’t see those things are being immoral. Instead he thinks that it is immoral NOT to discriminate against people for their religion, or their sexual identity, or their sexual orientation, or their gender. Bottom line, Roy Moore and people like him are the immorality sweeping this country.
And so on.
A very dark, tragic story from today: Kentucky State Rep. Dan Johnson dies of ‘probable suicide’ in Mt. Washington. The question you are to ask yourself as you read the story is how exactly was Johnson supposed to clear himself of the accusation if it was actually untrue?
Kentucky State Rep. Dan Johnson, who was under investigation for alleged sexual molestation, died of a “probable suicide,” the Bullitt County coroner said.
Bullitt County Sheriff Donnie Tinnell said Johnson drove onto the bridge over the Salt River on Greenwell Ford Road in Mt. Washington, parked on the north side of it and shot himself in front of his car. His body was found on the bank of the river, just past the bridge.
Just before 5 p.m. Wednesday, Johnson posted the following message on his Facebook page:
The accusations from NPR are false GOD and only GOD knows the truth, nothing is the way they make it out to be. AMERICA will not survive this type of judge and jury fake news . Conservatives take a stand. I LOVE GOD and I LOVE MY WIFE, who is the best WIFE in the world,My Love Forever ! My Mom and Dad my FAMILY and all five of my kids and Nine grandchildren two in tummies and many more to come each of you or a total gift from GOD stay strong, REBECCA needs YOU . 9-11-2001 NYC/WTC, PTSD 24/7 16 years is a sickness that will take my life, I cannot handle it any longer. IT Has Won This Life . BUT HEAVEN IS MY HOME. “PLEASE LISTEN CLOSELY, Only Three things I ask of you to do,if you love me is (1)blame no person,Satan is the accuser, so blame the Devil himself. (2) Forgive and Love everyone especially yourself .(3)most importantly LOVE GOD. P.S. I LOVE MY FRIENDS YOU ARE FAMILY ! GOD LOVES ALL PEOPLE NO MATTER WHAT !
On Tuesday, Johnson held a press conference at his church on Bardstown Road, where he denied the molestation allegations. According to court documents obtained by the Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting, the alleged molestation took place on New Year’s Eve in 2012. The alleged victim, who was 17 at the time, told authorities that she was staying in a living area of the Heart of Fire City Church where Johnson was pastor, when Johnson, who had been drinking a lot, approached her, kissed her and fondled her under her clothes. . . .
Johnson was never criminally charged.
People will laugh at his suicide note because the atheist left thinks everyone is expendable in the pursuit of power and it’s pretty cornpone. You might, on the other hand, think that given his religious beliefs he was more likely to be telling the truth and is less likely to have molested some 17 year old at a church where he had been pastor.
None of this is about paedophilia. Paedophiles should be hunted down and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. What this is about is ruining people’s lives with malicious lies. I don’t know what the right word is to use about people who are not suspicious when such matters are raised for the very first time about a public figure who has been in public life for thirty years and just before an election, but sensible and shrewd do not come to mind. Innocent and naive, if not just straight out stupid, seem a much better fit.
A truly sickening story, that comes with this just the other day: Porn star August Ames commits suicide after bullying for refusing to have sex with man who did gay porn.
Posted: Dec 14, 2017 12:02 PMUpdated: Dec 14, 2017 2:28 PM
Two stories work for me.
You know what it shows? It shows that Republicans are no smarter than the Swedes. The Democrats must laugh at the simpletons who have voted in someone whose values are at the far end of the Democrat extreme. The probability that Moore did any of what has been alleged is zero other than what should not matter in the slightest, that he dated young but over the age of consent girls when he was in his thirties (with the permission of their parents as well). To let this influence a vote towards the Party of Bill Clinton and Al Franken is grotesque.
Speaking of which, just when will Franken leave the Senate exactly?
There is a disgusting anti-Roy-Moore post at Instapundit where all the comments are not just pro-Moore but hugely irritated that such a post should be written and put up now. This is one of the comments which captures my sentiments quite well.
Mitch McConnell spends millions of dollars to defeat Moore. And fails.
Four women appear in a Washington Post story reporting misdeeds from 40 years ago that they happened not to remember until someone waved a hundred dollar bill under their snouts.
Minutes later – less than an hour – every GOPe in Washington glommed on and denounced him. Disowned him. Cut off the NRSC money. Warned people he wouldn’t be seated. Demanded he drop out. Ran a write in ringer! Literally within the hour.
These are the Republicans in Washington, mind you. All of them. There might have been ten who didn’t, but I can’t read every story personally so even that’s doubtful.
There has never been a more craven, coordinated, transparent, and evil attack on a man, not ever, and that includes against our president.
This isn’t cowardliness. This is the hill they’ve chosen to die on. This hill. And Bernstein’s there waving the bloody shirt right along with the rest of these traitors.
Traitors. As in, attempting to overthrow the government. At war with America.
God damn. I don’t care one way or another about Roy Moore personally. But when I see someone who is on my side being destroyed, you bet I’m going to be as mad as hell about it and I won’t forget.
If you didn’t know there was a coup on before, by God you should know now. And everyone’s dropped the mask yet again.
God help you, but I don’t think He will.
And then there was this:
Leftists and the GOPe are all about style over substance. I am sure Moore, whatever his multitudinous failings, would be a much more staunch defender of Jews and Israel than his opponent. But this matters less to the crowd which considers themselves nuanced and sophisticated than what words someone’s wife chooses to indicate that support. Trump was not elected for being eloquent. He was elected because a harsh truth poorly told is worth more than a host of well polished, and gloriously uplifting lies.
Our elite are shallow, unsophisticated rubes. One of the many ways you know this is by how high a priority they put on pretending that they aren’t. That is why I always use that insult against them. They really hate it because it is accurate, and it is what they fear the most — being seen as ordinary and no better than any other man. Because if they are ordinary, then how do they justify making decisions for everyone else?
And for interest, this is Roy Moore’s policy on Israel:
On Foreign Affairs, Candidate Moore states:
“We must remember that Israel is the United States’ most important ally and partner in the Middle East and should reject agreements or policies that undermine Israel’s security. We should pass the Taylor Force Act and move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.”
Moore clearly understands the importance of our strategic partnership with Israel.
Roy Moore also issued a separate two page position paper on Israel in which he gives the Biblical case for support of Israel as well as five detailed policy positions.
Candidate Moore’s Policy Positions on Israel include
- Opposing Economic Warfare against Israel, including “opposing all efforts to boycott Israeli companies and products as a means to isolate and delegitimize Israel.”
- Supporting Israel in the United Nations; “I oppose all efforts in the United Nations to isolate, sanction, and delegitimize Israel. The United States should veto all anti-Israel resolutions.”
- Supporting Direct Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations; “I oppose the imposition of outside solutions upon Israel and instead support direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that allow Israel to control decisions about its borders and safety. As long as Hamas and the Palestinian Authority wrongly refuse to recognize Israel’s right to exist, such negotiations have scant chance of success.”
- Supporting Military Assistance to Israel; Moore supports the current Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Israel. “This commitment includes layered missile defense, joint military exercises, and sharing of technological innovations.”
- Protecting Israel from Iranian Aggression; In addition to closely monitoring Iran’s actions regarding future nuclear development, Moore states; “The United states should also take all steps necessary to prevent Iranian financing and supply of terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas whose aim is to annihilate Israel.