On price stickiness (a consequence of Money Illusion) see this thread: Keynesian Money Illusion: does it work?
Please post your replies there.
Nothing in that thread has to do with price stickiness…
its too bad you cant write worth a damn. your whole philsophy is to talk past people and write walls of text and see what sticks. Says law is not a theory about aggregate supply and demand, though certainly such theories might be built of of it and other fundamental economic laws.
Says law is that goods are paid for with goods, and that any market demand is only possible through prior production.
try and deny either of these
if you dont want to talk about Says law dont title your thread Says law. just some advice.
Ray, you marked your own nonsensical and belligerent post as the answer to your original post. We’re not going to tolerate your trolling.
Consider this a final warning.
Ray, you marked your own nonsensical and belligerent post as the answer to your original post. We’re not going to tolerate your trolling.
Consider this a final warning.
Trolling? When none of you can answer my questions? Then why is not my answer an answer?
Final warning? Are you threatening me? As moderator, are you speaking on behalf of Mises.org as an agent? I have contributed to Mises.org financially in the past. You are shooting Mises.org in the foot, if they lose my financial backing–and others like me. I reserve the right to repost your remarks elsewhere for the world to see. No other site–even liberal sites that I disagree with–have tried to censor me. And the ASCII text you wasted making threats to me could have been spent answering some of my questions.
You’re doing Mises.org a disservice with your intemperate remarks.
RL
You have been responded to. You have continued to ignore answers posted.
You’re not being censored. You’re being informed that this style of discussion is below the standard of this forum. Raise your posting standard if you wish to continue posting here.
As have I. Donations do not give you free run in the community above the established conventions for debate.
No. You have been given a second opportunity to argue honestly. Make the most of it.
It’s been answered. You’re the one unable to answer anything.
If you have an “Issue” take it up with Mr Tucker.
Speak for yourself.
If Keynes (or Bernanke or Kevin Rudd) dropped fiat money from a helicoper onto a barter economy .. what would happen? You say it would “transform it into a sophisticated economy”. Nonsense! Both the tailors and the farmers would probably consider it litter and dump it in the garbage [:)]
“AustroGlide” pointed out the following in a footnote later in the conversation but I wanted to highlight here the error of your thinking: an epidemic is an exogenous shock, not an endogenous one!
As for whether the events of the last 7 months are an exogenous or endogenous shock, well I reckon that’s more difficult to answer without further study (I am just a student of economics). I like the Austrian explanation. Interest rates were certainly held down. The government - and central banking in particular - is certainly the elephant in the room. Still not convinced at the moment though as to whether a free market wouldn’t run into some kind of trouble of it’s own. I hear that is what Minsky says.
Steve Keen, an Australian (not Austrian) economist has been pretty much our “Dr Doom” here in Oz. Keen is critical of Austrian economics but hasn’t yet taken the time to write up an explicit critique of it (he seems reticent to reveal himself). He has referred “Austrian” readers of his blog to a paper he wrote on Say’s Law. I’m still reading through it. Slow going for me as I am still very much a beginner. I’d appreciate comments on the paper. I’ll start a thread later on it once I’ve read it. Note that Keen identifies as a post-keynesian and non-orthodox economist. He has a mathematics background and likes econophysics. His influences seem to be Minsky, Marx and Schumpter. Keen believes the answer to the crisis is what he calls “debt moratoria” - something he has only recently admitted to (as he felt the timing was right and he’s still not trumpting it from the rooftops). By this he means to cancel the debt (not to delay payments). I just don’t see how that could be done cheaply or fairly. He is quite prepared to crucifix the prudent saver (me) for the “greater good” i.e. to save helpless borrowers. It’s a real concern since he is getting some attention here in Australia. Ethically I can easily disagree with him. Of his economics I am less sure. Keen has been predicing a debt-based crisis since 1995 as far as I know. His blog posts are certainly very interesting. It does make me wonder if there is a way to use modern mathematics to come up with a more accurate simulation of the economy.