Form: Reply

—“Is criticism of economic velocity a sentiment against pure capitalism?”—Ayelam Valentine Agaliba

It’s that velocity is not a sufficient measure. At some point you’re either increasing risk(insufficient reserves) or decreasing accumulated capital(consuming reserves), or maximizing rents(creating fragility) such that it is not possible to (a) adapt to shocks, (b) adapt to change, because there is insufficient free capital or available debt to adjust the voluntary organization of production distribution and trade, consisting in patterns of sustainable specialization and trade, and you achieve in organizational continuity, the same effect as deflation in economic continuity.

Collapses aren’t rare and usually occur in one generation or less. But they always occur for the same reasons: accumulated fragility.

All the drastic collapses occur from overextension, economic colonization, export of technology, reproductive decrease, and primitive (empowered underclass) migrations willing to pay higher costs to obtain than advanced societies are willing to pay to maintain. (china the durable exception that even egypt didn’t survive.)

Now, in our current condition this fragility is 3 hours of power, 2 days of water, 7 days of food, 14 days of gasoline, and about 30-60 days of ‘chaos’. (Which I’m sure enough people in govt know. I know members of the boards of power companies who are all too clear about it.)

So i view pure capitalism as full accounting of all changes in state of all capital, not what it is now, ‘just run at high rpm’s until everything breaks’. SO it’s not a criticism of capitalism but a criticism of keynesianism (measurement of velocity without measurement of capital.)

AFAIK: all economic collapse is a failure of measurement.