Category: Economics, Finance, and Political Economy

  • Capitalism: How Much Is Wasted In Finding Market-based Solutions?

    I WILL TRY TO DO YOUR QUESTION JUSTICE:

    RE: “That represents a huge expenditure of human and physical resources that is not typically looked at when evaluating the efficiency of the winner.”

    Actually, it is obvious, common sense, and assumed in economics and politics, but we come to the opposite conclusion.  (a) we are constantly researching and developing new products and services, and variations of them through constant refinements of products, services, and prices called ‘entrepreneurial research and development”. It is not a process of PRODUCTION. The market is a process of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

    Furthermore, as the world consists of millions of resources, all of which have multiple demands on them, we must constantly look for what we refer to as ‘substitutions’ in the form of different resources, different suppliers, different technology, to adapt to constant changes in the demand for and availability of resources from the most simplistic primary resources to the most complex combination of sophisticated production techniques. 

    So. NONE OF IT IS WASTE.   The market is not a machine following a production program. It is a vast network of individuals working in networks some of us call ‘patterns of sustainable specialization and trade”, dynamically changing our efforts in response to other similar networks, in real time on a momentary basis in some cases (oil prices) and on a long term basis in others (commercial construction) and on a very, very long term basis for others (pharmaceutical research.)

    A COMMON ERROR
    It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics to apply very simplistic concepts of production to an economy. It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics and to fail to understand prices as an information system by which we coordinate ALL HUMAN ACTIVITY to serve each other’s needs, in a vast division of knowledge and labor, that is incomprehensible to any individual or group of individuals.  It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics to confuse the difficulty in producing goods and services, as one of applying labor, when labor is, in fact, the cheapest most ready commodity available, and worth very little. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult to ORGANIZE VOLUNTARY participation in production that is not a constant process of producing what is know, but a perpetually dynamic process of organizing the process of research and development, which produces an infinite variety of goods, wherein the competition between multiple producers forces all production to the lowest price, so that an increasing number of people can afford to consume goods. 

    Each of us produces very little. None of us, individually, matters to production. However, by voluntarily coordinating our efforts through self interest, by using the information system we call prices to guide us, we can cooperate by in a vast division of incomprehensible knowledge and labor.

    For this reason, people who ORGANIZE production are compensated highly for it, but those who CONSUME that production.  Largely, those of us who consume or labor, gain the benefit of our efforts, each of which is very small, in the form of affordable consumer goods and services.  Not necessarily as compensation. Because it is our labor that is of little value, and the organization of labor for the purpose of production as highly valuable. Because risk taking, forecasting, and guessing the future against competitors, so that we make the best use of the world’s resources at any given time, is what determines success or failure of the coordination of many people’s interwoven efforts as successful. And that success is told to us by the information system in the form of ‘profit’.  Profit which is quite hard to obtain it turns out.  That is because, except at the extremes, organizations, whether private or public consume the maximum amount of profit that investors will tolerate. 

    I HOPE THIS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

    It cannot be waste if it is experiment.  The problem with your question is that you assume we know what we do not and cannot know. It may help to remember that the socialists thought like you do and 100 million people are dead because of it. And the entire world has abandoned socialism (central planning of production) for this reason.  Prices and Incentives are inseparable. without prices we literally cannot think, or plan, or coordinate out efforts. Without incentives we cannot voluntarily get people to continue to conduct research and development.  Without research and development we cannot sustain production at low prices, with increasing advancement in technology, goods and services. Without advancement we would eventually become incrementally poorer as all differences between us were equilibrated, and the incentive to cooperate voluntarily declined. 

    EASY ENTRY LEVEL READINGS
    “I Pencil” (Essay)
    “The Use Of Knowledge In Society” (Essay / Hayek)
    “Parable Of The Bees” (Essay)
    “Economics In One Lesson” (Book / Haslitt)

    That’s about it. You get that. You get economics.  We call it The Economic Way of Thinking. 

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute.
    Kiev

    https://www.quora.com/Capitalism-How-much-is-wasted-in-finding-market-based-solutions

  • Capitalism: How Much Is Wasted In Finding Market-based Solutions?

    I WILL TRY TO DO YOUR QUESTION JUSTICE:

    RE: “That represents a huge expenditure of human and physical resources that is not typically looked at when evaluating the efficiency of the winner.”

    Actually, it is obvious, common sense, and assumed in economics and politics, but we come to the opposite conclusion.  (a) we are constantly researching and developing new products and services, and variations of them through constant refinements of products, services, and prices called ‘entrepreneurial research and development”. It is not a process of PRODUCTION. The market is a process of RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

    Furthermore, as the world consists of millions of resources, all of which have multiple demands on them, we must constantly look for what we refer to as ‘substitutions’ in the form of different resources, different suppliers, different technology, to adapt to constant changes in the demand for and availability of resources from the most simplistic primary resources to the most complex combination of sophisticated production techniques. 

    So. NONE OF IT IS WASTE.   The market is not a machine following a production program. It is a vast network of individuals working in networks some of us call ‘patterns of sustainable specialization and trade”, dynamically changing our efforts in response to other similar networks, in real time on a momentary basis in some cases (oil prices) and on a long term basis in others (commercial construction) and on a very, very long term basis for others (pharmaceutical research.)

    A COMMON ERROR
    It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics to apply very simplistic concepts of production to an economy. It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics and to fail to understand prices as an information system by which we coordinate ALL HUMAN ACTIVITY to serve each other’s needs, in a vast division of knowledge and labor, that is incomprehensible to any individual or group of individuals.  It is very common for people who lack knowledge of economics to confuse the difficulty in producing goods and services, as one of applying labor, when labor is, in fact, the cheapest most ready commodity available, and worth very little. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult to ORGANIZE VOLUNTARY participation in production that is not a constant process of producing what is know, but a perpetually dynamic process of organizing the process of research and development, which produces an infinite variety of goods, wherein the competition between multiple producers forces all production to the lowest price, so that an increasing number of people can afford to consume goods. 

    Each of us produces very little. None of us, individually, matters to production. However, by voluntarily coordinating our efforts through self interest, by using the information system we call prices to guide us, we can cooperate by in a vast division of incomprehensible knowledge and labor.

    For this reason, people who ORGANIZE production are compensated highly for it, but those who CONSUME that production.  Largely, those of us who consume or labor, gain the benefit of our efforts, each of which is very small, in the form of affordable consumer goods and services.  Not necessarily as compensation. Because it is our labor that is of little value, and the organization of labor for the purpose of production as highly valuable. Because risk taking, forecasting, and guessing the future against competitors, so that we make the best use of the world’s resources at any given time, is what determines success or failure of the coordination of many people’s interwoven efforts as successful. And that success is told to us by the information system in the form of ‘profit’.  Profit which is quite hard to obtain it turns out.  That is because, except at the extremes, organizations, whether private or public consume the maximum amount of profit that investors will tolerate. 

    I HOPE THIS ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION.

    It cannot be waste if it is experiment.  The problem with your question is that you assume we know what we do not and cannot know. It may help to remember that the socialists thought like you do and 100 million people are dead because of it. And the entire world has abandoned socialism (central planning of production) for this reason.  Prices and Incentives are inseparable. without prices we literally cannot think, or plan, or coordinate out efforts. Without incentives we cannot voluntarily get people to continue to conduct research and development.  Without research and development we cannot sustain production at low prices, with increasing advancement in technology, goods and services. Without advancement we would eventually become incrementally poorer as all differences between us were equilibrated, and the incentive to cooperate voluntarily declined. 

    EASY ENTRY LEVEL READINGS
    “I Pencil” (Essay)
    “The Use Of Knowledge In Society” (Essay / Hayek)
    “Parable Of The Bees” (Essay)
    “Economics In One Lesson” (Book / Haslitt)

    That’s about it. You get that. You get economics.  We call it The Economic Way of Thinking. 

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute.
    Kiev

    https://www.quora.com/Capitalism-How-much-is-wasted-in-finding-market-based-solutions

  • “…. democratic politics tends to concentrate benefits and disperse costs, so t

    “…. democratic politics tends to concentrate benefits and disperse costs, so that politicians in both parties face very strong incentives to promise current and future benefits without regard to the costs of those promises.

    Boettke. Hoppe by less antagonistic means. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 10:39:00 UTC

  • pretty public about the fact that I think Boettke is our best. So this is a sham

    http://www.economicthought.net/blog/?p=5163I’m pretty public about the fact that I think Boettke is our best. So this is a shameless plug of the failure of the mainstream to understand Hayek’s contribution. Prices and knowledge are making a slow comeback. Specifically that prices DISTORT knowledge accumulation, not just incentives, and that this process accumulates and is expressed in our theory of the business cycle.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 09:28:00 UTC

  • a profession that earns its salary teaching MBA students could ask for no better

    http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.kr/2013/10/gene-famas-nobel.html” a profession that earns its salary teaching MBA students could ask for no better result than to find that better knowledge and training lead to better investment management. Too bad the facts say otherwise.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 09:25:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://reason.com/reasontv/2013/10/15/economics-teaches-us-humility-qa-with-au


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 09:23:00 UTC

  • WHY IS POLITICAL ECONOMY ONCE AGAIN CENTER STAGE, WHILE MONETARY AND FISCAL POLI

    WHY IS POLITICAL ECONOMY ONCE AGAIN CENTER STAGE, WHILE MONETARY AND FISCAL POLICY CLAIM LESS ATTENTION?

    Because it’s become obvious that democracy, permanent growth, equality, diversity, and the end of political innovation were false assumptions.

    Tribalism has, does, and will always rule.

    Perhaps academia should focus more on institutions of cooperation rather than optimum choices for all.

    MONOPOLY IS A BAD IDEA EVERYWHERE IN NATURE THAT WE FIND IT.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 08:57:00 UTC

  • “INEQUALITY IS THE PRICE OF DIVERSITY” Now some people have tried to argue other

    “INEQUALITY IS THE PRICE OF DIVERSITY”

    Now some people have tried to argue otherwise, but they confuse the market with the political and normative. AGGREGATES ARE DECEPTIONS. Aggregates launder causality.Causality in human affairs consists of people following incentives in real time, where those incentives are, at any moment, more or less probable. And people are quite simple following their incentives:

    INCENTIVE SELECTION

    1) The Greatest Reward

    2) In the shortest time.

    3) At the least effort.

    4) At the lowest risk.

    5) With the greatest certainty.

    ANOTHER PROPERTARIAN LESSON : CLEARING THE NETWORK OF PREFERENCES

    People do not order their preferences. The evaluate the weights of any action in CLEARING a set of preferences. They evaluate the set of any actions in clearing further preferences.

    ANOTHER PROPERTARIAN LESSON : THE STATUS ECONOMY

    1) Status is the human economy, and money is just a vehicle for it.

    2) Loss aversion for status is higher than any other loss aversion other than life, limb and offspring. Money isn’t as important as status. Status gets one access to opportunity.

    3) STATUS SIGNALS in group are CHEAPER to get an maintain than status signals across groups.

    That last bit is why diversity doesn’t work.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-20 07:44:00 UTC

  • MULLER : IS THE MARKET MORAL? (Important Propertarian Concept: Market And Morali

    http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/is-the-market-moral-JERRY MULLER : IS THE MARKET MORAL?

    (Important Propertarian Concept: Market And Morality)

    Yes the market is moral in the universal. No it is not in the particular. BUT lets look at this a little more deeply.

    Muller is the author of THE DEFINING intellectual work on Conservatism. It was his work that convinced Jonathan Haidt that there was more than one moral code. Both is book _Conservatism_ and his Teaching Company Lectures, are the first and most important discussion of conservatism in rational and moral terms.

    Conservatism, like libertarianism, has produced a landscape littered with trite entry-level works that are little more than pop entertainment, or statements of personal enlightenment. And there are only a handful of authors who produce more than sentimental, allegorical, or historical works. And that is because conservatism, still, remains an habituated moral philosophy, not a rationally articulated one – Something some of us are trying to change. Muller changed that with _Conservatism_.

    **This particular essay shows however, that even Muller still does not grasp the market as the REPOSITORY into which we have transformed ALL immoral action. It is the ONLY place we allow immorality. And that is because the market produces virtuous consequences as an output of that instinctively immoral activity: competition. The negative feedback to the producer creates the incentive for the producer to improve his or her wares, or to price them more cheaply. It creates a squirrel cage wheel of increasing quality and decreasing prices.

    The market has made LIFE outside of the market, increasingly moral. The virtue of the immoral process of the market, produces virtuously moral longer term outcomes in terms of prices, quality and choices.

    But more importantly, it does not require we eliminate our attempts to outwit each other. It simply gives us a single virtuous venue in which to do it. And the consumer always wins, no matter what bet he places.**

    WHAT YOU SHOULD READ

    _Conservatism_

    http://www.amazon.com/Conservatism-Anthology-Political-Thought-Present/dp/0691037124/

    _The Other God That Failed_

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Other-that-Failed-Deradicalization/dp/069100823X

    “Us and Them : The enduring power of ethnic nationalism”

    http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/63217/jerry-z-muller/us-and-them

    “Capitalism and Inequality : What the right and the left get wrong”

    http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/138844/jerry-z-muller/capitalism-and-inequality

    WHERE HE IS WRONG

    The Mind and Market

    The Jews and Capitalism

    His failure is perhaps our own failure to articulate property, property rights, reproductive strategy, the mind, moral intuitions and moral codes as the cause of both ‘the mind and market’ and the near universal condemnation of jewish morality despite their success in the market.

    No one is perfect. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-19 09:04:00 UTC

  • ON EDUCATION (Brilliant. Concise) Caplan is the best critic of expensive and ine

    http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/10/the_iron_laws_o.htmlCAPLAN ON EDUCATION

    (Brilliant. Concise)

    Caplan is the best critic of expensive and ineffective university educations.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-18 08:29:00 UTC