Almost no one here disagrees that neo-classical economic
theory is a fraud and a failure, and virtually everyone agrees that the heterodox critiques of Keen, Hudson, Lars, Asad etc. are more accurate and the right direction. Can’t we move on to suggesting policies and structural changes that align with the conclusions of our agreed upon conclusions like:
1) It’s a monetary economy, not “a veil over barter”
2) Money and credit are the most potent and significant factors in such an economy
3) Private for profit finance having a monopoly on credit creation is a massive contradiction in an allegedly free enterprise theory and system, and also requires that the sole form and vehicle for the distribution of credit-money be Debt ONLY
4) Hence private money creation must end, but because public money creation could also be just as problematic its money creating ability and monetary policies must be firmly and unmistakably aligned with an unimpeachable ethic like the natural philosophical concept of grace as in love in action, i.e. policy as in direct and reciprocal monetary gifting at a strategically rational, effective and definitive point in the economic process. That is at retail sale, which will invert the presently agreed upon reality of individual and systemic monetary austerity into monetary abundance, and will also change the chronic inflation of modern economies into beneficial price deflation.
5) Science as wonderful, necessary and interesting as it is, is immersed in complexity and rarely accomplishes solutions because its task is the reductive process of discerning factual truths. We should aim for discerning the elegant, deep, holistic and resolving simplicity (a single new concept) of a new paradigm, which concept applied intelligently changes the entire pattern of the area of human endeavor it applies to.
Isn’t this the truly serious course of thought and action? Or is this blog merely a debating society?