> Ed Weick wrote:
>> Trouble with economists is that they come in various shapes and sizes.
>> Though they are all exposed to the same things at university, they interpret
>> and use them in different ways. I'm sure that Friedman, Galbraith and
>> Keynes all knew about the competitive model, etc., but what policy advice
>> they gave went well beyond that and differed greatly.
>
> What matters is that those economists who now tell politicians _worldwide_
> what to do all come from the same nest of neo-con ideology (Leo Strauss), so
> it's merely self-serving PR BS from economists to pretend that economists
> are the puppets of politicians instead of the other way 'round.
>> Trouble with economists is that they come in various shapes and sizes.
>> Though they are all exposed to the same things at university, they interpret
>> and use them in different ways. I'm sure that Friedman, Galbraith and
>> Keynes all knew about the competitive model, etc., but what policy advice
>> they gave went well beyond that and differed greatly.
>
> What matters is that those economists who now tell politicians _worldwide_
> what to do all come from the same nest of neo-con ideology (Leo Strauss), so
> it's merely self-serving PR BS from economists to pretend that economists
> are the puppets of politicians instead of the other way 'round.
Incredible fellow, this guy
Strauss. Imagine having given rise to the thinking of all of the
economists who now advise politicians. What an
accomplishment!
>
>> Reagan was a supply sider with an enormous faith in the stimulative effects
>> of cutting taxes for the entrepreneurial class, who would use the freed-up
>> money to grow the economy.
>
> Actually, cutting taxes for the rich does not "free up money" but BINDS up
> money, and Reagan used BORROWED money to grow the ARMAMENTS industry with
> his Strangelovian nuclear arms race. Letting the productive segments of
> industry to fall apart certainly doesn't attract investments.
> If even you are embellishing Reagan like that, I must wonder about your
> assertion about the diversity among economists.
>> Reagan was a supply sider with an enormous faith in the stimulative effects
>> of cutting taxes for the entrepreneurial class, who would use the freed-up
>> money to grow the economy.
>
> Actually, cutting taxes for the rich does not "free up money" but BINDS up
> money, and Reagan used BORROWED money to grow the ARMAMENTS industry with
> his Strangelovian nuclear arms race. Letting the productive segments of
> industry to fall apart certainly doesn't attract investments.
> If even you are embellishing Reagan like that, I must wonder about your
> assertion about the diversity among economists.
I wasn't embellishing
Reagan. I was simply trying to say something about how he saw
things. I personally don't see things the way he did. My own
economics mentor, Jack Firestone, used to tell me that I was nothing but a
journalist pretending to be an economist. I was very
grateful.
>
>> All one can say is that bright ideas and reality rarely coincide.
>
> This is true for predators and the systems hijacked by them. But it could
> be different if the producers would get together against this mega-fraud.
>
>
>> All one can say is that bright ideas and reality rarely coincide.
>
> This is true for predators and the systems hijacked by them. But it could
> be different if the producers would get together against this mega-fraud.
>
????????????????????????????????????!!
Ed
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Futurework mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Futurework mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
