T.R. Malthus’s Principles of Political Economy first edition was published in 1820

This is the 200th anniversary of the publication of the first edition of Thomas Robert Malthus’s Principles of Political Economy in 1820.

The funny thing is that I was thinking about the publication of Malthus’s first edition of his Principles only because I was thinking about how hard it is to maintain friendships with other economists who differ with our own views, which from that led me onto thinking about the greatest friendship in the history of economics, the friendship between David Ricardo and Robert Malthus, and how Ricardo had written to Malthus, just before he died, that even had they agreed on everything instead of disagreeing on everything – which was more or less the truth of it – he could not have liked Malthus any more than he did. It really is how economic discourse should be undertaken. And from that it occurred to me that the publication of Malthus’s text led onto the General Glut debate, the formulation of what we now call Say’s Law, which then instigated the Keynesian Revolution and thereon to modern macroeconomic theory. There can hardly be an anniversary in the entire history of economics more significant than that.

The second edition from The Liberty Press can be found online here.

The Outline

Malthus may have been the single most influential economist who has ever lived – Karl Marx included. In his own time there was his Essay on Population which was a crucial element in the structure of economic theory as well as a good deal of social policy in his own time and for long after. Far more important, however, was his Principles of Political Economy, published exactly two hundred years ago this year in 1820, which touched off a debate over the possibility of a “general glut” – demand deficiency – that has had two sets of consequences. In his own time and until 1936, the mainstream of the economics community were united in denying the possibility of a general glut, that is in denying the possibility of over-production as a cause of recession and high unemployment. But then, of even more significance, John Maynard Keynes, following his coming across the general glut debate in his reading of Malthus’s correspondence with Ricardo at the trough of the Great Depression in 1932, was set on the road to write The General Theory in which the possibility of a general glut – a deficiency in the level of aggregate demand – was developed so that an under-employment equilibrium was seen as not only possible but common.  Virtually the whole of mainstream economic theory has as a result accepted Malthus’s conclusion down through to the present day.

Malthus published his economics text Principles of Political Economy exactly two hundred years ago in 1820, but what made its publication so notable was that Malthus was already world-famous because he had previously published his Essay on Population in 1798 (a book which has never since then been out of print). Malthus’s Principles was not therefore just another text on economic theory but was authored by the most famous “public intellectual” of his time.

In so far as economic theory was concerned, it was a generally standard account for its time, except that he argued that the recessions that had followed the Napoleonic Wars which had ended in 1815 were due to a general glut, or in modern terms, to a deficiency of demand. The notion of a general glut needed to be distinguished from a particular glut. That an individual product could be produced in quantities so large that not all production could be sold was recognised as obviously true. A general glut, however, suggested that not just individual products, but an excess of output in general of everything could be produced.

The reason that a general glut might occur was due to over-saving. Production was being channelled into proportionately too large a flow of capital goods rather than into consumer demand. The additional capital was creating a flow of output beyond the willingness of the population to consume everything that had been produced, leading to a general glut and a high level of unemployment.

His solution was that the landed aristocracy be encouraged to spend more and invest less.

This proposition led to what has since been called “the general glut debate” which, according to Thomas Sowell, continued through until 1848, only finally coming to an end with the publication in that year of John Stuart Mill’s own Principles of Political Economy.

The core question of the general glut debate was whether it was even conceivable in a world of scarcity that the productive powers of an economy could overwhelm the willingness of a community to buy everything that had been produced. It was conceded by all that too much of any individual product might be produced, and that if there was a large disorganisation in the specific goods and serviced being produced an economy might end up in a downturn where many might lose their jobs.

Virtually every economist at the time entered into this debate.

But the economic consensus was that an economy could not produce more than an economy.

McCulloch/Torrens

They may be wrong but at least they’re consistent

Labor industrial relations spokesman Tony Burke said it was “now well established that penalty rate cuts have not created new jobs”. “Continuing with this flawed strategy is the last thing we need right now; we don’t need more cuts, we need people spending to lift Australia out of recession,” he said.

That’s from The Oz. The amount of economic damage these Keynesian clowns have caused is astounding. And as social diseases go, this seems to be the most difficult to eradicate. Toxic stupidity. And I will say it again and invite anyone to show any instance where this has turned out to be wrong: No Keynesian stimulus has ever led to a fall in unemployment and an increase in economic growth.

I mention it only because the nonsensical belief that spending leads to higher levels of production – when it is higher levels of production which lead to higher spending – is just routine anti-capitalist, anti-free market rhetoric without a scrap of evidence to support it.

Might add this while I’m here since Dangerous Dan Andrews is amongst the worst of them. In this case its its this: Coronavirus: Black Lives Matter protest kills off commonsense.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews (left) and Black Lives Matter protesters gather in Melbourne on Saturday. Pictures: File

The Black Lives Matter marches in Melbourne and everywhere else signalled the death of commonsense in Australia.

No social distancing, an infectious demographic and deep-seated carelessness have combined to produce the obvious.

Actually, it’s about the only good thing Andrews has done since it will bring the lockdown to an earlier end than might otherwise have happened.

Two of the least surprising stories you might ever read

.

Plus this.

You would have to laugh at the left if they weren’t so dangerous

And then, in less than a day, they went from calling for volunteers to calling for food.

More of the backstory here.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS: Along the lines of who will save us from our saviours – The Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone Has Already Had Its First Incident Of Self-Appointed-Police Violence.

The ratio of idiots to sensible has been rising and is now at crisis levels.

Police Story

This is the entire text of America, We Are Leaving. The author and me are both asking how this has come about. He starts with the words, “This is the hardest thing I have written”.

I grew up in a law enforcement family. My father worked his way up to the rank to Captain at the Ft. Smith (AR) Police Department. As I kid I remember going with him on Friday to pick up his check and I was in awe of these super heroes he worked around. They were funny and fun to be around. Men and women of all races all with the same mission, to make the community safer.

My dad sacrificed a lot and so did my late mother. Whether it was the week long surveillance or wiretap or chasing drug runners across the country, he gave it all for my family and worked plenty of extra details to never let our family be without. Some would call that privilege but where I grew up, it was called hard work.

The kids at school thought it was cool what my dad did and while he sometimes asked me if anyone gave me a hard time, they never did. There was a respect among all….even the kids in shop class. I didn’t grow up wanting to be a cop but one fatful night, as a freshman in college, that all changed. I went on a ride along and my life’s journey would never be the same.

After four years of college my dad wanted me at an agency that respected that education so I moved to Tulsa (OK) at 21 years old and never looked back.

I didn’t know anyone and all I know was what I saw my dad do, work hard and treat people with respect. I saw a lot of other cops working hard as well and doing all they could to keep the community safe. 27 years has passed and if you would have told me the condition of law enforcement today, I would have never believed you.

It’s not that law enforcement has changed for the worse but everything around it has.

The mentally ill used to get treatment and now they just send cops. Kids used to be taught respect and now it’s cool to be disrespectful. Supervisors used to back you when you were right but now they accuse you of being wrong in order to appease crazy people. Parents used to get mad at their kids for getting arrested and now they get mad at us.

The media used to highlight the positive contribution our profession gave to society and now they either ignore it or twist the truth for controversy to line their own pockets.

There used to be a common respect among criminals. If they got caught, they understood you had a job to do but now it’s our fault they sit in handcuffs rather than their own personal decisions.

If someone attacked a cop, they were seen as such. Now we martyr them and sue for millions.

We used to be able to testify in court and we were believed. Now, unless there is video from three different angles, no one cares what you have to say.

With all this talk about racism and racist cops, I’ve never seen people treated differently because of their race. And while I know that cowards that have never done this job will call me racist for saying it, all I’ve ever seen was criminal behavior and cops trying to stop it and they didn’t give a rip what their skin color was.


The Founder of Blue Line Bears Is Broken As She Recognizes That The World Hates Her Dad Just For The Uniform That He Wears.

I’ve seen cops help and save any type of race, gender or ethnicity you can think of and while that used to mean something, no one cares anymore. I’ve been called every name you can think of and many of them with racial overtones and it’s never come from cops. I’ve watched African American cops take the brunt of this and even talked one rookie out of quitting after he was berated by a lot of cowards that had the same skin color as him.

I’ve heard words I never heard before being a cop. Uncle Tom, Cracker, Pig and the N Word just to name a few. I’ve heard them thousands of times and never once did I see a police officer retaliate.

They just took it.

Despite that, it’s been the greatest opportunity of my life to do this job. I would have recommended it to anyone and I secretly hoped one of my kids would do it one day.

But today, all of that is over. I wouldn’t wish this job on my worst enemy. I would never send anyone I cared about into the hell that this profession has become.

It’s the only job you can do everything right and lose everything.

It’s the only job where the same citizens you risk your life for hate you for it.

It’s the only segment left in society where it’s cool to discriminate and judge, just because of the uniform you wear. You never get to explain.  You can never reason with them.

The nasty words have now turned into rocks and bottles and gunfire.

I’ve watched it happen to those around me and I have seen the total destruction of their life. This job is a walking a time bomb and you could get cancelled or prosecuted on the very next call, even if you do everything right.

No profession has to deal with that.

Doctors kill 250,000 people a year. They call them “medical mistakes” because society understands that they do a very difficult job under high stress and they must make the best possible decision in the moment.

Law enforcement is tasked with the same and we are highly successful. Despite the most violent society we have ever seen, less than 1,000 suspects are killed a year. 96% are attacking us with weapons and all but a few others are attacking us with their cars or their fists and more and more with simulated guns so Benjamin Crump can help their family win the lottery.

I’ve seen cops risk their own lives when they shouldn’t have…….just to keep from taking one.

They never get the credit that other professions get.

Cowards are all around us. From chiefs to sheriffs to politicians, no one has our back. Now, the little we have, we are told they are going to defund us or even abolish us. Citizens with a political agenda will reign over us and all you have to do is wake up and put on a uniform to be a racist.

This weekend I received death threats for just doing my job. It would have been outrageous a decade ago and made national news. Now, it’s just a Monday. There will be more threats, more accusations of racism and more lies told about us. I used to talk cops out of leaving the job. Now I’m encouraging them.

It’s over America. You finally did it.

You aren’t going to have to abolish the police, we won’t be around for it. And while I know, most Americans still appreciate us, it’s not enough and the risk is too high. Those of you that say thank you or buy the occasional meal, it means everything. But those of you that were silent while the slow turning of the knives in our backs happened by thugs and cowards, this is on you.

Your belief in hashtags and memes over the truth has and will create an environment in your community that you will never expect. If you think Minneapolis will turn into Mogadishu and that is far from you, it’s coming. And when it does, remember what your complicity did.

This is the America that you made.

 

Just how nuts is the left?

https://twitter.com/i/status/1269951088964370432

And the question comes from CNN! The reality is that everyone does believe they can in some sense depend on the police for security and protection. Not to mention this:

Defund the ABC

And as an example of the typical lying that the ABC can be counted on, we have this: Trump tweets conspiracy theory about Buffalo protester police officers knocked to ground. Here’s the tweet:

And here’s the truth:

Martin Gugino is a 75-year-old professional agitator and Antifa provocateur who brags on his blog about the number of times he can get arrested and escape prosecution. Gugino’s Twitter Account is also filled with anti-cop sentiment [SEE HERE]. Last Thursday Gugino traveled from his home in Amherst, New York, to Buffalo to agitate a protest crowd.

During his effort Gugino was attempting to capture the radio communications signature of Buffalo police officers. CTH noted what he was attempting on Thursday night as soon as the now viral video was being used by media to sell a police brutality narrative. [Thread Here] Today, a more clear video has emerged that shows exactly what he was attempting.

In this slow motion video, you will see Gugino using a phone as a capture scanner. You might have heard the term “skimming”; it’s essentially the same. Watch him use his right hand to first scan the mic of officer one (top left of chest). Then Gugino moves his hand to the communications belt of the second officer. WATCH CLOSELY:

You can find the complete story here.

THIS IS OUR ABC NOT THEIRS: It’s been pointed out in the comments that the story quoted above on “the conspiracy theory” is from the American ABC. So this is the same story from our ABC: Trump tweets conspiracy theory about Buffalo protester police officers knocked to ground. Did you really think the ABC collective would miss an opportunity to spread falsehood that allowed them to push their agenda?

On the day of George Floyd’s funeral, President Donald Trump on Tuesday touted a conspiracy theory in a high-profile case of alleged police misconduct caught on video — involving an elderly protester pushed to the ground and seriously injured.

On Twitter Tuesday morning, Trump suggested that 75-year-old Martin Gugino, who remains hospitalized in serious condition after being shoved to the ground by two Buffalo, New York, police officers, may be an “ANTIFA provocateur” and that the whole incident could be part of a “set up.”

Gugino’s lawyer has since called the president’s accusations “dark, dangerous, and untrue.”

“No one from law enforcement has even suggested anything otherwise so we are at a loss to understand why the President of the United States would make such dark dangerous, and untrue accusations against him,” Kelly Zarcone said in a statement of the president’s accusation against her client, who she said has been released from the ICU but remains hospitalized.

Defund the ABC.

Parsing “Black Lives Matter”

We have heard the phrase for quite some time, but to tell the truth I still don’t know what the words mean, although I may be the only one who has this difficulty.

I don’t wish to be ultra-metaphysical about it, but while I can understand each of the words on their own, in combination very little comes clear.

What, for example, is a “black life”? I can see that “black” may be referring to a skin colour, but I don’t see how that works in combination with the word “lives”. Do lives come in colours? Are there any other colours in which lives come? What specifically is a black life? How does a black life differ from a life of another colour? Comes to that, what other colours do lives come in?

OK, so suppose we can find a definition of this entity described as “black lives” how do we interpret the word “matter”? What does it mean to matter? As a verb, “matter” is defined as “to be important or significant”. Fair enough, but in what way is that so? A life which is coloured black is said to be “important or significant”. To whom is it important or significant? To whom should it be important or significant? Not instantaneously clear. To an individual? Which individual? To anyone else? To whom? In what way should it matter?

According to wikipedia:

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an international activist movement, originating in the African-American community, that campaigns against violence and systemic racism towards black people.

Turns out that the words should not be divided but only read together and as such it is an “activist movement”. So we have this:

Activism consists of efforts to promote, impede, direct, or intervene in social, political, economic, or environmental reform with the desire to make changes in society.

Let us therefore bring “movement” into play.

A political movement is a collective attempt by a group of people to change government policy or society with mainly political goals. Political movements are usually in opposition to an element of the status quo and are often associated with a certain ideology.

Black Lives Matter is therefore an attempt by a group of people (and not necessarily just black people) to change government policy or society with mainly political goals. It is thus a lobby group.

What is its program? What are its aim? What does it seek from others? What legislation is sought? How would the world be different if they achieved their goals?

It’s all about Trump

Thumbnail

From There is a linkage between the coronavirus hoax and the riots:

“It’s just not what they say it is. From the moment Hillary Clinton lost the 2016 presidential election, the Left has been determined to destroy not only the Trump presidency but also the very country that allowed such an enormity to occur. They — the DNC, the big media, academe — have thrown everything they have into the fight, and that they have now turned to outright violence in its late stages ought to tell you something, both about the ‘resistance’s’ history, and the future it has planned for you.”

There might have been a time when parties of the left had sensible ideas for improving personal safety and welfare, but these are long gone. They are now all in every way socialists who have no sound ideas about how to improve the welfare of the community. It is only the fact that harming business immediately harms communal welfare that constrains the actions of a government of the left. They understand nothing about wealth creation. Their only knowledge is how to convince people to vote against their interests. It is “marketing” without substance.

Bear in mind that the city in which George Floyd died is 100% governed by Democrats in a state that has been governed by Democrats since forever. The only idea they can come up with is to defund the police.