I was moved to comment on another blog from John Hearn a Banking Economist and Lecturer. John Responded to my comment as follows.
“I agree Roger. Sometimes you need naive to undermine those academics who hide behind big words, unintelligible econometrics, silly assumptions. Also, people can read it and point out what is wrong. I take solace in the fact that no one explains this or that is wrong, will you?”
I certainly will John with pleasure, as the following Twitter conversation shows I think online Dialogue over Skype is a good way to examine Starting assumptions through to delineation of points of difference.
Let’s get to the bottom of the Forest Gump business.
Money is what is immediately available to use in a transaction.
R- Forrest Gump’s definition of money.
Article was 1000 word max. Do not confuse public good, which is precise, with the good of the public. I made it clear the government must buy the public good on our behalf and private priority rights are more efficient than common property rights.
Off to the gym now!
John Twitter is not a forum which gets to the heart of matters will you agree to an online interview/Discussion.
Roger Lewis and David Malone: One Interview To Unite Them All.
First of all, I’d like to introduce the interviewer Roger Lewis (left) who was, to me, most unexpected in his approach, the interview was no love in and he was not afraid to challenge David on the basis of his own views and outlook, for example on Brexit. I only know Roger through the blogosphere and the first surprise to me was his appearance. I’d imagined him as the type who went to bed in a suit and tie and only slightly loosened his collar when the temperature exceeded 35 degrees celsius. Instead I was confronted by a sanitised version of Catweasle! Long flowing locks and moustache, I hope he’ll forgive the Catweasle reference, casual clothes but a razor-sharp mind. There was an obvious chemistry between the two so even in times of disagreement there was no shouting across each other, both were able to make their points informatively.
I was asked if I had a brilliant idea for 21st century economics and I replied that it is all on my blog. I was then asked if I could put it altogether in one clear and concise piece. Here it is, but the economists will not like it as the brilliant idea reduces them to academic observers rather than interventionists. The assumption based upon centuries of observation is that the economy works best without them or the Establishment interfering.
The best way to rethink economics is to think about what it was that worked in the past and, rather than lose it, think how it can be improved upon for the future.
Although imperfect, capitalism is the only tried and tested economic model that has been successful in promoting economic growth, raising living standards and bringing about greater equality of income and wealth.
Unfortunately economists do not want to…
View original post 992 more words