Display:
ARGeezer:
Economics, of necessity, deals with wealth, money and banks.  Economists, of necessity, learn that they must respect the prejudices and the interests of the wealthy if they are to find wide employment for their educational qualifications in existing societies.  And in our debased society, respect and acclaim follows wealth and worldly success.  Combined, these factors are powerful forces for stasis in economic thought.  The effectiveness and explanatory power of an economic system only comes to be relevant so long as it also favors stasis of existing wealth distribution.

But since banks are not in fact necessary for money generation (other than money as debt), and wealth need not in fact be a claim over wealth issued by a bank, then a new Economics may perhaps be developed to explain an emergent post-Finance Capital economics.

"Any economic unit can emit money. The serious problem is to get it accepted" Hyman Minsky

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Mon May 11th, 2009 at 03:45:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Possibly. But then that new Economics must provide jobs (p2p credit consultants?) and funding for academics (lobby your politicians).

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
by A swedish kind of death on Mon May 11th, 2009 at 05:30:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series