dmb wrote: > Summary of the "economics" thread: > > Jan Anders Andersson said: > "Economics is not about values" and "Economics is a way to AVOID values". > > dmb replied: > According to the MOQ, fame and fortune are social level values. According to > the MOQ, our recent history is a clash of values, namely social level values > as opposed to intellectual values. > > Jan's big comeback: > ...Therefore: Economics without value is nothing. > > dmb says: > Apparently, Jan just doesn't care to be consistent and he doesn't care what > Pirsig actually says about economics either. What would be the point in > continuing such a conversation? Since there has been zero comprehension of > the only point made, I really don't see any reason to bother. >
> According to the MOQ, fame and fortune are social level values. > Economists certainly use numbers and other quantitative forms of analysis but > economics is a social science, which is to say that the subject matter is a > certain, limited range of human behavior. According to the MOQ, our recent > history is a clash of values, namely social level values as opposed to > intellectual values. David Economics is a science as far as it concerns the numbers, but the numbers used are based on something called Price, which is a very unreliable source for a discipline to be called science about human values. The subject matter of human behaviour is very, very limited. If we should have crises regarding, physics, bridge construction or spaceships in the same scale as the economic crises, the world would be in a considerable dangerous position. Price is defined as what sellers need for an acceptable profit and what buyers are ready to pay in general for it. If we should try to build a motorcycle with that kind of scientific accuracy it would probably more look like something coming out from a bakery oven. The social level values based on Victorian economics is more of a lottery than science. The basic problem is the unability for price to correspond to human values. Human values, estimated product quality, are to money numbers, price, as dynamic values are to static patterns. Static Quality is nothing without Dynamic Quality, just as Economics based on price is nothing without human values. The major part of the economics practicized today is not with the purpose to produce good things that the customers need but to make profit. To produce more money numbers, regardless product or duty. No serious business decision is taken from the maximizing of customer value in mind. The maximizing of the profit (the number part) is the general commanding issue. Members of the board that won't support the alternative that gives the highest numerical yield are removed from the position, sooner or later. Accounting is based on the sellers benefit, the income minus the cost to produce. The customer value which is based on the quality of the good is regarded as secondary at best, despite it's importance for every single deal to be done. I don't have access to the english version, but if you look at ch 17 in LILA, about page 10 of the chapter, the text following after RMP citing E B White, you'll find that he (RMP) says something like this in english: "The MOQ gives the vocabulary. A free market is a dynamic institution. What people buy and sell, what people values, can never be included in an intellectual formula. Dynamic quality makes the market work. The market is perpetually in change and can never be predicted." Therefore, according to MOQ: Economics is nothing without values. I'd appreciate if someone could give me the correct sentences in english. Jan Anders > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
