Re: Annual Reminder

["John B. O'Donnell" <jackodonnell@xxxxxxxx>]

Mason A. Clark wrote:
>
>   It is absurd that the theories of the economic system do
>   not, in 1997, use the well-developed techniques of
>   system analysis.  Such techniques in engineering can be
>   recognized by their use of flow charts and transfer functions
>   with paths and feedbacks.
>
>   Questions of cause and effect look quite different (and more
>   uncertain) when seen on such diagrams.  It is not trite to
>   remember that one such picture is worth 10,000 words.  It is
>   important in the real world that pictures are more easily
>   understood by more people than are jargons mumbled or
>   mathematics obfuscated.

A grand description of some of the fallacies of economic
analysis. Perhaps you like to add that when graphic depictions
are used they are as likely to show relationships that are
tautologically impossible [Aggregate supply and demand depicted
as sensitive to price.] or based on belief without evidence [The
unsupported inference of a relationship of aggregate supply and
demand to have separate but definitive relationships with a price
ratio.] as they are to visually enlighten otherwise difficult to
comprehend concepts.

>    I am expressing my frustration when reading economics that
>    cries out for such visible analysis.  At the moment I know of only
>    two who have recognized this: Trond Andresen and Steve
>    Keen.  Perhaps you can better inform me -- surely there must
>    be others.  Is there one economics book that uses system
>    analysis of the sort well known in engineering?

So who are these heretics; I should probably be looking for there
writings.

			-- jbod
___________________________________________________
Come visit and see a new economic perspective --
       http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1067
           Comments/arguments welcome.
..