[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DAiO3Qmbwc&feature=g-u-u&context=G24aa7a4FUAAAAAAAMAA"]Politicians Don't Understand Economics (or Gold & Silver) - Mike Maloney - YouTube[/ame]
I think that's right . and tragically party politics inevitably dictates priorities which are linked to short term results and the overwhelming requirement of re-election . The surprising thing to me is that those who have the background and education to understand this almost self evident fact don't appear to do much to try and change matters . Partly this stems from the inexactitude of really knowing how an economy works and the specific required changes needed to produce a stated outcome . Therefore , everybody thinks they are an expert and has an opinion . And who is to judge the value of these different opinions ? And , How ? And on What Authority ? Tricky area , but , for sure , the present system is ludicrous .
An amusing aspect of the right wing position is that, given the government is deemed to have no 'real' influence on the economy, there is no rationale for this "short termism" ramble typically offered. Consider, for example, their application of rational expectations and how that supposedly destroys any impact of fiscal policy on employment (i.e. we don't even get a short term Phillips Curve created through temporary money illusion). We finish with a simple result: the right wing position has no understanding of how government behaves. We'd of course have to borrow from more general political economy to understand bounded rationality and also aspects such as the behavioural traits of the median voter.
We have yet to agree on anything , but I can honestly say that I have not the slightest idea what your Post says . Brilliant or Gobbledy Gook ? And though it might have dropped a few points with age , my IQ is MENSA plus . Whilst this says little about wisdom , it usually means I can at least understand how words link sensibly. Here , I can't even have an opinion
Where did you struggle? There wasn't anything inherently complicated in the post. It was basic economics after all. Given the thread's title, there is some Canadian irony to be had here!
I have learned just to ignore Reiver. He insults almost everyone, spews forth rant after rant and 99% of the time flat out refuses to offer any links to factual evidence of his 'thoughts' and he often avoids answering even the simplest questions. To me, he is little more then a depressed, lonely troll who occasionally makes a decent point but usually just spews forth bile with the aid of an economic thesaurus.
You should know your Keynes: "Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist". Politicians are no different
I cannot afford to be too critical as I am not averse myself to kicking dumb arses where they need to be kicked . But I do think he needs to be more tolerant publicly , however Messianic his private opinion of himself . My concern is his inability to write sensibly in English . He goes "deaf" when this is mentioned , but no College Tutor would tolerate it for more than one Essay .And Business people would push his files out of the fiftieth storey windows on the spot . IMHO
In terms of "economics", that would be pursuing economic rationality. Why would that be unpopular, except perhaps to the religious right who are motivated by restricting our well-being?
since when is raising interest rates to purge the system in order to clear all mal investments politically popular?
You're not referring to economic rationality, you're referring to a dogma that you follow without thought. As I mentioned earlier, there is a fascinating double standard shown by the right wing. They refer to comments like 'political popularity' or 'short termism electoral policy' but its purely reliant on individual bounded rationality (that's "stupidity" to help raymondo along!). They have to attack individualism in order to make their dogmatic humph over government policy
