Considering that your de-bunking of DSGE and discovery that when the rate of change of private debt/credit falls that the economy will enter recession unless more credit/private debt is injected into the economy, and that yet such injection merely results in the continual build up of debt to the point of unservicability is the macro-economic re-discovery of C. H. Douglas’s cost accounting analysis/calculus and A + B theorem which established him as the first disequilibrium theorist,
Considering that Michael Hudson has correctly identified the dominant business model of finance as a titanic parasite that sucks both a vast percentage of the profits out of our highly productive capabilities not to mention much of its vitality and human hopefulness, that macro-economics is an extremely young body of knowledge that only came into being after the coalescence of finance and its money creating power and paradigm of Debt Only, and so has never considered that it is not a legitimate economic/productive business model at all despite its money creating powers having increasingly become necessary for middle class necessities like homes, automobiles and education, and is also a flow of additional costs post retail sale which is presently the actual legitimate end of the entire economic/productive process for every item or service,
Considering your support for “QE for the people” is a tacit admission that there is a scarcity ratio rate of flow between total individual incomes and total costs/prices which was C. H. Douglas’s Social Credit insight,
Considering that employment participation has no where to go but down with innovation and the virtual inevitability of the disruptive force of AI and the only other way to increase individual incomes is the current paradigm of the flow of Debt/Additional Cost/Continual Build Up Only, then a new paradigm is absolutely necessary,
Considering that you yourself have critiqued economists for having little or no education in accounting and have found it effective in tracking stocks and flows of money, that one of the requirements for a new paradigm is that it fit virtually seamlessly within most current structures and at the same time transform them by creating a whole new pattern, and that double entry bookkeeping is the integrative infrastructure within and upon which the entirety of commerce sits and is classified and codified, it would undoubtedly be fruitful to analyze and craft the new paradigm’s policy effects so as to fit within it and its digital nature,
Considering that if you take rational and ethical control of the terminal ending and summing points for all costs and so prices for every item or service as well as the terminal expression point for all forms of inflation with a large percentage digital debit/credit discount/rebate monetary policy at final retail sale, and hence you can provide a better alternative for commercial agents than inflating their prices, namely with a 50% discount/rebate a doubling of every individual’s potential purchasing power and so the doubling of potential money for every enterprise’s products or services….and so the consequential integrating of price deflation painlessly and beneficially into profit making systems,
Considering that the two major signatures of historical paradigm changes are conceptual opposition to the old/current paradigm and inversion/transformation of its problematic dualities, and that the current paradigm for the vehicle and form for the creation and distribution of money/credit is Debt Only, how can the new paradigm be anything but monetary free gifting to the point of inversion of the current scarcity ratio between total individual incomes and total costs/prices into an abundance ratio, and hence the transformation of the economic and monetary systems from austere, balky and unstable to stabily prosperous and dynamically free flowing?
Considering that paradigm changes are penultimate cultural events, and long over due paradigm changes like the monetary and economic paradigm of Debt Only which has been in force for at least the 5000 year old course of human civilization have the potential for effecting multi-disciplinary leaps of human cultural evolution including that of consciousness studies, do we have to wait another 5000 years, as David Graeber has shown us, to change the current monetary and economic paradigm from Debt Only to Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting, or can we begin a grass roots movement to communicate your researches and the obvious self interests of the dual policies of Douglas’s Social Credit that I have extended, innovated and philosophically plumbed, raising it from merely a better theory to the point of paradigm change and so get somewhere with political and paradigmatic change? ….instead of concentrating our efforts on only trying to change the minds of ego involved academics and theorists?