parametric shift

["William B. Ryan" <william_b_ryan@xxxxxxxxx>]

...the story line put out by Bill Ryan that the only
matter of concern is "parametric shift from labor
displacement".
------------------------------------

John, the messages you sent that I did not forward to
the list are archived at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/hermann
If there is anything else you would like to be
included there, please let me know.

The list software at Topica is practically disabled I
am quite sure by a disgruntled former subscriber who
made no secret that he is a "computer expert."  I am
working on getting the list re-enabled so that it
functions correctly.  I am told that one way that can
be accomplished is upgrading it from a "free" list,
which I may do.  The main advantage to doing that is
that it will enable actual communication with the
Topica "human" administrators for customer service.
The "free" list gets only automated computer
responses to queries for assistance.  A few mouse
clicks at Topica will correct the problems we have
had.

There are several reasons why moderation is
essential.  The New Zealand list was destroyed by
spammers, mostly pornographers and "hackers" with
appended "self-replicating" viruses.  So at the very
least there has to be some moderation to preclude
spam.  The Post Keynesian list was recently spammed
by two virus containing messages supposedly coming
from two prominent subscribers who are apparently
unmoderated by the list's moderator.

It is also necessary to direct the discussions
meaningfully.  The purpose of our list is not merely
to be a "chat" forum for bored people with nothing
else to do to kill time.  There are plenty of places
to "chat."

I am disappointed that you have not cooperated with
me in working through the A + B theorem, which was
the purpose behind the challenges to your assertions.

The "underconsumptionists" like Gesell focused on
accumulating account balances, calling it "saving,"
"hoarding" etc.  They never were able to meaningfully
respond to their critics who said that every dollar
saved is at some point spent, that saving is spending
in another form called "investment."

The response that there are "lags" is by itself
insufficient to explain why there is a deficiency in
purchasing power because double entry accounting
compensates by lagging (or delaying) the expensing of
certain cash disbursements.

Douglas defined "costs" as A + B because there are
accumulating account balances held by firms and
consumers.  The flow of costs therefore is A + B and
the flow of purchasing power to consumers is A.  So
we look at the ratio of A + B to A.  The condition of
"quasi" steady-state is where, while both numerator
and denominator are changing dynamically, they are
changing proportionately, such that the ratio remains
constant.  In quasi steady-state there is never a
shortage of purchasing power, so we concede that part
of the orthodox argument (though they don't quite
understand it themselves - they present it merely to
"refute" the underconsumptionists to "prove" that
costs = income).  Quasi steady-state is however a
quite unnatural condition.

But if the ratio of A + B to A is increasing, the
reflux from A will never amortize the accumulating
"debt" that A + B represents.

The question becomes what is it that will cause the
ratio to change through time?

The answer is found in the industrialization
(increasing "division of labor" through technology)
that comes with time, where account balances held by
firms are increasing in ratio to the account balances
held by consumers.

That is the "parametric shift" we generically call
"labor displacement."
--




____________________________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10