There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.
“The typical Fed senior economist career path is kindergarten to PhD to the Fed, and become a Fed lifer.” This is true of most of all our bureaucracy. It’s the reason I live about half my days certain that we are all doomed.
The more I observe, the more I think about Stalin's comments about Bureaucrats. Is there any tentacle of government that is without corruption and incompetence? The cancer seems to have spread quite quickly the past few decades.
Excellent piece. The Fed is a government agency no different than any other. I don’t trust the Fed with monetary policy the same way I don’t trust the USPS to deliver a package on time.
When I step back and analyze the phenomena of suppressing free speech on the part of the social media platforms, I see their withholding as an indicator that the culture of social media lacks real emotional intelligence. To suppress free speech, is like denying a person the right to be heard, which is an extension of one's credibility, and it reflects on their inadequate ability to trust the commons, in an effort to find consensus . I view our public forums as a real public commons, as well, and consensus is essential, and integral to free speech . Without this process, we shall resort to all kinds of manifestations of insanity to varying degrees, and that is not my wish for a civil society . Their suppression makes me wonder, since it is done by an "invisible hand", if it's nature is that of totalitarianism, and for that I worry.
Supreme Court decision on free speech which you cite, and govt action to the contrary should go the Supreme Court as soon as possible. Not sure why it hasn't.
It’s not just economists who fail to look beyond the immediate favourable consequences of an action. Short-termism has been a brewing problem in the US across all disciplines with the noted exception of our political leaders who refuse to enact term-limits on themselves.
Is it implicit yet unwritten in Voltaire's quote that the person he disagreed with was not purposefully lying?
Should lies that can not stand the test of a court of law be protected speech?
A lie, presented as if fact and truth, is a fraud perpetrated on the less capable thinkers in society. Lies are playing a shell game with people's minds who lack critical thinking skills. To the extent people who lack critical thinking skills and are Influenced by lies also vote, lies on the political arena result in frauding the voting public.
Slander and libel are already illegal. If I say the moon is made of cheese, so that be banned? And who determines "truth" and "lies"? We have been lied to constantly by our leaders and media over the years. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... Those lies are far worse than anything some random individual could say. Recently, we were told repeatedly as absolute fact by "experts" that vaccinated people would not spread Covid. People were deplatformed for suggesting otherwise.
How about the Big Lie? It isn't slander or libel. It could not withstand the scrutiny of fact as required by a court of law. Yet millions have bought into it and it endangers America's democracy. Lies that can not stand up in a court of law yet are intended to and do influence voters is what I'm talking about. We can do better without allowing the 1st Amendment right of free speech being used as cover for nefarious purposes.
“The typical Fed senior economist career path is kindergarten to PhD to the Fed, and become a Fed lifer.” This is true of most of all our bureaucracy. It’s the reason I live about half my days certain that we are all doomed.
Thanks for the memories of the greats: Bastiat, Hazlitt, Sumner, and Psaki
The Great Psaki.
The more I observe, the more I think about Stalin's comments about Bureaucrats. Is there any tentacle of government that is without corruption and incompetence? The cancer seems to have spread quite quickly the past few decades.
Excellent piece. The Fed is a government agency no different than any other. I don’t trust the Fed with monetary policy the same way I don’t trust the USPS to deliver a package on time.
When I step back and analyze the phenomena of suppressing free speech on the part of the social media platforms, I see their withholding as an indicator that the culture of social media lacks real emotional intelligence. To suppress free speech, is like denying a person the right to be heard, which is an extension of one's credibility, and it reflects on their inadequate ability to trust the commons, in an effort to find consensus . I view our public forums as a real public commons, as well, and consensus is essential, and integral to free speech . Without this process, we shall resort to all kinds of manifestations of insanity to varying degrees, and that is not my wish for a civil society . Their suppression makes me wonder, since it is done by an "invisible hand", if it's nature is that of totalitarianism, and for that I worry.
What I find disturbing, is the lack of the defenders of free speech. We seem to have entered into the Twilight Zone.
Supreme Court decision on free speech which you cite, and govt action to the contrary should go the Supreme Court as soon as possible. Not sure why it hasn't.
It’s not just economists who fail to look beyond the immediate favourable consequences of an action. Short-termism has been a brewing problem in the US across all disciplines with the noted exception of our political leaders who refuse to enact term-limits on themselves.
Is it implicit yet unwritten in Voltaire's quote that the person he disagreed with was not purposefully lying?
Should lies that can not stand the test of a court of law be protected speech?
A lie, presented as if fact and truth, is a fraud perpetrated on the less capable thinkers in society. Lies are playing a shell game with people's minds who lack critical thinking skills. To the extent people who lack critical thinking skills and are Influenced by lies also vote, lies on the political arena result in frauding the voting public.
Slander and libel are already illegal. If I say the moon is made of cheese, so that be banned? And who determines "truth" and "lies"? We have been lied to constantly by our leaders and media over the years. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan... Those lies are far worse than anything some random individual could say. Recently, we were told repeatedly as absolute fact by "experts" that vaccinated people would not spread Covid. People were deplatformed for suggesting otherwise.
How about the Big Lie? It isn't slander or libel. It could not withstand the scrutiny of fact as required by a court of law. Yet millions have bought into it and it endangers America's democracy. Lies that can not stand up in a court of law yet are intended to and do influence voters is what I'm talking about. We can do better without allowing the 1st Amendment right of free speech being used as cover for nefarious purposes.
Which Big Lie?
Seriously Havenstein? Read on https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/19/politics/donald-trump-big-lie-explainer/index.html. And as a reminder, 60+ attempts in court failed to provide facts that supported the Big Lie. Where you been, man?
Oh there have been a lot more than one big lie over the years.
Yet the only one that has threatened America's representative democracy and the basis for an insurrection is #45's.
Quantitative tightening? We don’t need no stinking quantitative tightening!!!
🔥
I've given up on economists. I find astrologists to be far more trustworthy and reliable.
FYI, Whitney Webb's book will be published Sept 22. She talks at length about it in this podcast.
https://rokfin.com/post/95602
There will be a Kindle and audible version.