It has been a long-tme me-myself thinking (I am in Ego mode sorry) that we do nto knwo a jot about economy after Keynnes because the eocnomy is so different that the object of analysis has never really been studied.
It is thus necessary to study te economy properly... and one of my old crazy let's make economics a science again proposals was to ahve a flow chart with all the money in all thje forms.. not only M! and 2 and 3.. and the rest.. but the real flow of money...the units would be all the industries (porbably up tp 200 differnt types of industries and units fof commerce), bank instruments and accounts (maybe around 200 over there), then another 200 to divide the population in different greoups and structures.. and then measure the flows..
Int his way you would know exatly what th emoney is going to do if you reduce or increase taxes...
The only problem with flow chart is that some of the boxes would be outside of the country under consideration.. but I guess youc an model it with a simple flow adn assumption .. though this ould not be the case with the big blocks... the number of US dollars abroas iaextremelly important...but ideally you woudl do the sam ehting for all the money abroas and what it is doing.
A pleasure I therefore claim to show, not how men think in myths, but how myths operate in men's minds without their being aware of the fact. Levi-Strauss, Claude
In 2003, Mohammad Gani[1], a pupil of Leontief, introduced Consistency Analysis in his book 'Foundations of Economic Science' (ISBN 984320655X), which formally looks exactly like the input-output table, but explores the dependency relations in terms of payments and intermediation relations.
But it has been never pushed to a "physics level" of effort... not only industries but different groups of people employed....and not employed....income segreagates, place of living... education....
