Re: Economic Dimensions

[Hyman Blumenstock <hystock@xxxxxxxxx>]

Nature has declared a reality among all of Nature's living creatures --
that of attaining a "living" by opening ones incoming orifice and
munching on something nourishing.  That is the source of Economics, the
Science of Scarcity (of nourishment, during the Agrarian ( and
Pre-Agrarian) era.  Who to feed and who not?

However, since the end of the Agrarian era, there has been more than
enough to feed us all.  So, that should have signalled the demise of
Economics the Science of Scarcity with its Rube Goldberg, far removed
from reality ultra complicated mechanism, that serves counter to its
original purpose, by using a once surrogate for Food, Money, and
arbitrarily declaring that to be in scarce supply, as Food once was.

What possible difference the inner workings of a Rube Goldberg machine
that has lost sight of its aboriginal purpose?

Hyman

Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> John O'Donnell wrote on Oct. 25:
>
> >
> > I believe Basil Moore's error is confusing the measure used to
> > judge what to do with the control used to do it. Yes, money
> > interest rates are affected by the actions of a central bank that
> > restrict the availability of credit. But, it is not the only
> > consequence of those actions and it is definitely a measure, not
> > a control.
>
> The issue of "confusing" measures with controls depends on what system
> one is studying. If "the economy" is understood in terms of many
> *interacting* systems, rather than one system, what is considered a measure
> for one system might function as a control for another. Since every
> system can be distinquished by a purpose, the confusion will lessen
> if people state the purpose or intent of their system along with a
> list of "measures" and "controls" associated with their system.
>
> Harry Veeder
>
>