Posted To RWER Blog 06/18/2018: Upon Viewing My 203rd Steve Keen Video

Me:  Actually Helen they do have some half baked and not thoroughly informed policies as enumerated in this blog post:

Upon Viewing my 203rd Steve Keen Video
So far as economics is concerned you can’t get any more basic than the point of exchange itself, and any more integrative than the infrastructure upon which all exchange takes place and is accounted for than double entry bookkeeping…..and economists do not look/do not go there….and so do not discern the monetary and economic significances to be found at these points in time and with that discipline.

Keen, who is the best of the heterodox economists and from whom I have learned much so far as correct macro-economics is concerned….still has not crashed through the haze of the monopolistic and parasitic paradigm of Debt Only by looking where I have been suggesting he look for like 4-5 years.

He also hasn’t taken my advice and started a mass movement by and for the individual and the small to medium sized business community because they are both who the policies I suggest will benefit from the most and also the constituencies big enough to herd the politicians toward implementation of them. He’s still trying to convince a very small constituency of academics who are egocentrically opposed to him….despite continually quoting Max Planck about how “science advances one funeral at a time.” I don’t get it.

Then he suggests debt write downs/debt jubilee as a policy despite it being only of a one off STATIC nature, the character of which he has long opposed in his correct de-bunking of DSGE.

He also advocates UBI/universal dividend even though he apparently has no idea from where and when it originated, and also has none but orthodox ideas about how to finance it so that it would be effective instead of an eventual opportunity for regressive thinkers to critique and reverse it….because despite liberal orthodoxy it would inevitably cause inflation….because money itself is not the operant factor in “monetary” inflation.

Finally, he has absolutely no idea of how to synergize the positive effects of a universal dividend with discount/rebate policies throughout the entire economic process and at its terminal ending point.

I’m tired of otherwise smart guys being such blinkered and shallow thinking mere theorists and reformers when if they took the closer look, had paradigm perception and had the guts and intelligence to step out and oppose Finance in a politically savvy way they’d actually change the world.

So I guess I have to do that myself.


P:  I have often noticed that people who are older than 25 or so and who never learned to drive a car are very likely to never learn to drive. Indeed I have seen such people bridle at the suggestion they should learn even though driving is, well, useful if not necessary.
I believe this is true for those who never learned in their youth about ordinary differential equations, coupled ordinary differential equations, or nonlinear coupled differential equations. When I see Steve Keen kajoling Paul Krugman to consider learning about this and Krugman’s reaction against learning this important math skill I see poor Keen shocked to see the same reaction I have seen in one who is too old to learn how to drive.

Me:  Keen is good at looking at problems like the fact that neo-liberalism is incorrect in using only linear equations. He’s not so good at perceiving either the current problematic paradigm of Finance, namely Debt/Burden as virtually the only vehicle and form for the distribution of credit/money, or the new paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting.

Also, being somewhat overly abstract as nearly all economists are he doesn’t contemplate the present time actions of commerce (exchange). Nor does he have a good understanding of the digital nature of the discipline that underlies that exchange and how that nature could be utilized to linearize tremendously beneficial monetary and economic policy effects DIRECTLY to the individual AND RECIPROCALLY to enterprise.

Hence he’s still trapped within the current paradigm and can only suggest “epicycle” policies instead of realizing the paradigm changing ones derived from directly looking at the above.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s