Ed,

 

I think we are mostly in agreement in this discussion. Though we might have different conclusions, we know what the basis for them are.

 

Inflation originally meant something specific and informative. Now it has come to mean something else.

 

OK.

 

I fear that this change of use leads us away from the serious problem of expansion of the “value measure” supply.

 

I don’t think the change in the “defined concept” has helped analysis at all.

 

You understand and accept it, which is also all right.

 

Harry

********************************************
Henry George School of Social Science
of Los Angeles
Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91042
Tel: 818 352-4141  --  Fax: 818 353-2242
http://haledward.home.comcast.net
********************************************
 


From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:23 AM
To: Harry Pollard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Slightly extended (was Re: [Futurework] David Ricardo,CavemanTrade vs. Modern Trade

 

Harry, I guess prices have not come down because the money supply has increased more rapidly than productivity.  The English language has proven enormously flexible.  Get used to it.  If we want to call rising prices "inflation", we can, though we know that the root cause is an increase in the volume of money and credit in relation to available goods.  BTW, cosmologist also use the term to describe what happened to the universe immediately after the big bang.

 

Ed

 

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to