Thanks Julio, it's good to know somebody actually reads these ravings. As everyone with an ounce of understanding of economics knows, it's not the nominal amount of debt that matters, it's the debt to GDP ratio. More GDP means more revenue to service debt.
But what if the Pope and the Cardinals don't believe in God? Could they admit it and still retain their hold over their flock (and the assets of the Vatican)? I mean what if the ruling class doesn't believe in the GDP and knows damn well that to admit the Emperor has no clothes would be to forfeit their hegemony and very possibly their necks. It seems to me that if our almighty and merciful rulers lost faith in GDP, they would go on a binge of asinine "austerity" and deflationary "debt reduction" all the while hypocritically insisting on the sanctity of GDP and holy growth. This would enable them to rake in as many chips as they can before the deluge. Suddenly, if you look differently at the GDP end of the debt to GDP ratio and don't assume liars believe their own lies, the austerity swindle makes a lot more sense. On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 3:22 AM, Julio Huato <[email protected]> wrote: > For more immediate purposes, there's still the question of whether to > use these measures or not. I think it depends. I admit that, in > principle, there may be cases in which GDP measures are not only > potentially misleading, but that it may in fact be impossible to > determine a proper way to correct for the bias. Let alone the size, > the algebraic sign of the bias may flip, so that using GDP measures or > using "random" numbers may yield the same results. That said, I doubt > it seriously that this is the case in general. > > -- Cheers, Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
