Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • (((Success?))) It’s because sophistry sells, specializing in moral hazard is the

    (((Success?))) It’s because sophistry sells, specializing in moral hazard is the most profitable industry, and free riding is a tremendous discount, and we are in an era of mass communication, and no defense against sophism.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-03 09:05:00 UTC

  • Economic thought circumvents the sentimental and intuitive by design, which mean

    Economic thought circumvents the sentimental and intuitive by design, which means the brevity of the format is challenging without those readily available methods of accessibility. That said Heterodox science spreads faster on social media, and Heterodox econ is a candidate.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 11:37:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991642931588222976

    Reply addressees: @PeterBoettke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990905426907750400


    IN REPLY TO:

    @PeterBoettke

    “Economists tweet less, mention fewer people and have fewer conversations with strangers than a comparable group…” https://t.co/rq824H4P4i

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/990905426907750400

  • (pareto in everything)

    (pareto in everything)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 01:22:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991487980626939906

    Reply addressees: @karlbykarlsmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991439180881330181


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991439180881330181

  • ( Yeah, it’s worth noting that the most expensive sex slaves sold by ISIS are bo

    ( Yeah, it’s worth noting that the most expensive sex slaves sold by ISIS are boys. High market demand, low scarcity of supply. O. M. G. What is wrong with people? Seriously!!!! )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 00:43:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991478266941886464

  • From what I can gather, the current price of a slave in Libya is $200. Which is

    From what I can gather, the current price of a slave in Libya is $200. Which is about the going price of an AK-47 around the world.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-01 21:37:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991431406520864768

  • ( Yeah, it’s worth noting that the most expensive sex slaves sold by ISIS are bo

    ( Yeah, it’s worth noting that the most expensive sex slaves sold by ISIS are boys. High market demand, low scarcity of supply. O. M. G. What is wrong with people? Seriously!!!! )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-01 20:43:00 UTC

  • De gustibus non est disputandum by Steve Pender Not quite. If you don’t pay for

    De gustibus non est disputandum

    by Steve Pender

    Not quite. If you don’t pay for the costs (packaging, moving, defense) of your aesthetic, we gonna dispute. This is why there’s conflict sometimes between male aesthetic (direct, utilitarian, minimalist) and female (representational, extravagant, status-seeking). Aerospace/industrial/military vs shabby chic/victorian (at the extreme of female taste). It almost seems that some women have to be figuratively dragged kicking and screaming into the future.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-01 20:20:00 UTC

  • Positive Money

    http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/12/ecb-confirms-helicopter-money-legally-feasible/
    POSITIVE MONEY (“Helicopter Money”) Direct Redistribution of Liquidity to Consumers (Citizens). I’ve been talking about this forever, and written it into the new constitution. But there is a small group in europe that’s put together a web site and initiative. The EU is much more complicated than the states. And they are … overly protective of investors (which I don’t recommend), so it’s actually quite a bit easier in the states. My proposal was to buy (nationalize) Mastercard (good infrastructure, horrible company), and use their network for direct redistribution of liquidity (money). http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/12/ecb-confirms-helicopter-money-legally-feasible/ http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/10/report-ecb-helicopter-money/ (I’ve contacte them) Thanks to Moritz Bierling for the head’s up.
  • Positive Money

    http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/12/ecb-confirms-helicopter-money-legally-feasible/
    POSITIVE MONEY (“Helicopter Money”) Direct Redistribution of Liquidity to Consumers (Citizens). I’ve been talking about this forever, and written it into the new constitution. But there is a small group in europe that’s put together a web site and initiative. The EU is much more complicated than the states. And they are … overly protective of investors (which I don’t recommend), so it’s actually quite a bit easier in the states. My proposal was to buy (nationalize) Mastercard (good infrastructure, horrible company), and use their network for direct redistribution of liquidity (money). http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/12/ecb-confirms-helicopter-money-legally-feasible/ http://www.positivemoney.eu/2016/10/report-ecb-helicopter-money/ (I’ve contacte them) Thanks to Moritz Bierling for the head’s up.
  • Why Direct Redistribution of Liquidity vs Tax Breaks, Monetary Policy(interest) or Fiscal Policy(spending)

    Timeliness. In a shock, tax breaks, lowering interest rates, and fiscal policy are extremely slow, and it certainly appears from the data, largely ineffectual compared to simply distributing cash to every citizen to do with as he may. During the 2008 Crisis only me and Galbraith were talking about it (and I am nobody). Later a few others tepidly put forward the argument. Galbraith died, or he might have gotten somewhere. We could have all but paid off american home mortgages with the trillions we spent. So that was what I recommended. We could have done that and the world pricing structure would not have had to adjust. Since then I’ve come to understand that while MMT cannot work without hyperinflation, (a) there is no meaningful reason for consumer interest, and (b) there is no meaningful reason for NOT distributing liquidity directly to consumers rather than through the financial system (monetary policy), the state (fiscal policy), or tax rebates (tax policy). The problems with these methods is that they must be algorithmic (rule of law) just as is targeting the money supply today, or politicians will destroy the economy for votes. The reason I advocate this system is not just reciprocity (and therefore morality) but I want to force the financial system to seek returns on innovation (investment) rather than returns on rents (loans). And I want to addict the population to those returns, so that the bureaucratic government is incrementally eroded in return for increasing those direct redistributions, and so that people are hesitant to allow immigrants who merely capture those dividends leaving less for the citizenry. This is the best way to kill the state I have ever come across.