Re: The (or an) Economists's Can Opener

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

Paul Davidson wrote:

<<SNIP>>

> In fact in his speech early this week, Greenspan stated that monetary
> policy canb not permanently affect the rate of unemployment, thereby
> implicitly accepting the concept of a natural rate of unemployment.  No
> wonder he can't see  "full" employment as a worthy objective, when his
> conservative monetarist vision is clouded by the Friedmanic concept of   A
> NATURAL RATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT.

Full employment may be a worthy objective but even worthy
objectives can't be accomplished by methods that are not
causally related to the objective. Pretending that
inconsistent outcomes from various choices for monetary
policy indicate that unemployment should be addressed by
manipulating money supply is just another example of
economists proselytizing a favorite unfounded belief.

While I can pretend no knowledge of Greenspan's beliefs,
acknowledging that unemployment can only be meaningfully
addressed by methods that affect employment does not itself
demonstrate a belief in NAIRU. It only demonstrates a
willingness to accept the inevitable truth of the
tautological certainty that printing money is not a CAUSE of
employment.

Time to look elsewhere for a CAUSAL relationship.
Distribution among "variable" and "fixed" costs of
production CONTROLLABLE by government policy is just such a
causal relationship. See: _Three Steps to Economic Freedom_
at: http://www.geocities.com/jackodonnell.geo/c00r4.html

<SNIP>>
--
			-- jbod

		Tax Privilege, Not People
___________________________________________________
Come visit and see a new economic perspective --
       http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1067
           Comments/arguments welcome.
.