Economic theories are nothing compared to economic policies and their actual effects. Desired economic effects depend upon their being implemented in the temporal universe at significant and relevant places and times within the economic process that also have direct, immediate and the desired effects.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with theorizing, but if you desire individual and systemic abundance instead of austerity, a definitive way of ending inflation instead of enduring it or claiming some conservative orthodoxy that it can’t be dealt with or liberal orthodoxy that it won’t occur…..then YOU’RE JUST NOT LOOKING at the integrative infrastructure of all commerce, i.e. double entry bookkeeping and the significant places and times where policies can be implemented that all heterodox economists here would agree….IS WHAT THEY’D LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN IN THE ECONOMY……ON A CONTINUING BASIS.
Is it okay here to have a discussion about the nature of accounting, economic policies that are possible from that nature and an economic analysis of the direct temporal universe effects of those policies implemented at specific points???
The main reason why ALL present econometric models are wrong is they’re not looking directly at the economy, economists are largely ignorant of the identical natures of double entry bookkeeping and the pricing and money systems and hence they do not realize that policies that will resolve the major problematic situations in modern economies are possible by coming out of their habitual and near abstract fugues and LOOKING at the above tools and their significances to the economy.
On an epistemological scale looking is right below the highest level of knowledge possible, that is, knowing.