b********n
发帖数: 38600 | 1 Capitalism has two sides, the productive side where people earn their income
and the parasitic side where the rentiers live off unearned income.
The Classical Economists had shown that most at the top of society were just
parasites feeding off the productive activity of everyone else.
Economics was always far too dangerous to be allowed to reveal the truth
about the economy.
How can we protect those powerful vested interests at the top of society?
The early neoclassical economists hid the problems of rentier activity in
the economy by removing the difference between “earned” and “unearned”
income and they conflated “land” with “capital”.
They took the focus off the cost of living that had been so important to the
Classical Economists to hide the effects of rentier activity in the economy.
That’s what they call blowback.
John Bates Clark is to blame but he died in 1938.
Poor old Milton Freidman came along and didn't find out what he'd changed. | b********n
发帖数: 38600 | 2 The Classical economist, Adam Smith, observed the world of small state,
unregulated capitalism around him.
“The labour and time of the poor is in civilised countries sacrificed to
the maintaining of the rich in ease and luxury. The Landlord is maintained
in idleness and luxury by the labour of his tenants. The moneyed man is
supported by his extractions from the industrious merchant and the needy who
are obliged to support him in ease by a return for the use of his money.
But every savage has the full fruits of his own labours; there are no
landlords, no usurers and no tax gatherers.”
How does this tie in with the trickledown view we have today?
Somehow everything has been turned upside down.
The workers that did the work to produce the surplus lived a bare
subsistence existence.
Those with land and money used it to live a life of luxury and leisure.
The bankers (usurers) created money out of nothing and charged interest on
it. The bankers got rich, and everyone else got into debt and over time lost
what they had through defaults on loans, and repossession of assets.
Capitalism had two sides, the productive side where people earned their
income and the parasitic side where the rentiers lived off unearned income.
The Classical Economists had shown that most at the top of society were just
parasites feeding off the productive activity of everyone else.
Economics was always far too dangerous to be allowed to reveal the truth
about the economy.
How can we protect those powerful vested interests at the top of society?
The early neoclassical economists hid the problems of rentier activity in
the economy by removing the difference between “earned” and “unearned”
income and they conflated “land” with “capital”. They took the focus off
the cost of living that had been so important to the Classical Economists
to hide the effects of rentier activity in the economy.
The landowners, landlords and usurers were now just productive members of
society again.
It they left banks and debt out of economics no one would know the bankers
created the money supply out of nothing. Otherwise, everyone would see how
dangerous it was to let bankers do what they wanted if they knew the bankers
created the money supply through their loans.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/quarterly-bulletin/2014/
money-creation-in-the-modern-economy.pdf | b********n
发帖数: 38600 | 3 Economics, the time line:
Classical economics – observations and deductions from the world of small
state, unregulated capitalism around them
Neoclassical economics – Where did that come from?
Keynesian economics – observations, deductions and fixes for the problems
of neoclassical economics
Neoclassical economics – Why is that back?
We thought small state, unregulated capitalism was something that it wasn’t
as our ideas came from neoclassical economics, which has little connection
with classical economics.
On bringing it back again, we had lost everything that had been learned in
the 1930s, by which time it had already demonstrated its flaws. | m*********9
发帖数: 56 | 4 资本主义不能救中国,左派社会主义毁中国
income
just
【在 b********n 的大作中提到】
: Capitalism has two sides, the productive side where people earn their income
: and the parasitic side where the rentiers live off unearned income.
: The Classical Economists had shown that most at the top of society were just
: parasites feeding off the productive activity of everyone else.
: Economics was always far too dangerous to be allowed to reveal the truth
: about the economy.
: How can we protect those powerful vested interests at the top of society?
: The early neoclassical economists hid the problems of rentier activity in
: the economy by removing the difference between “earned” and “unearned”
: income and they conflated “land” with “capital”.
| m******r
发帖数: 6963 | |
|
