AXECwiki

 

 

 

Onblog Archive_0

4

 

RWER  Value — the Bermuda triangle for economic theories. Comment on ‘Economic Value is NOT Price.’ Plus  All economists together now: Solow’s Swan Song.  Plus  How to get out of  psychology/sociology/ wish-wash.

 

RWER  Information and ignorance. Comment on ‘Information Matters?’

 

RWER Keenonomics, aggregate demand/change of debt, and some misleading critique.  Plus   When numbers don’t add up.  Plus  More than two centuries of waffling in the dark. Again  See * below.  Plus  Cross-references.  Plus  The trouble with counting to 3.  Plus  Mental messies and loose losers.

 

RWER  Wake up: economics is not a science of behavior. Comment on ‘The Context-Dependency of Human (Economic) Behaviour.’ Plus  A farewell to PsySoc economics.  Plus  The art of start. Plus

Heterodoxy at the crossroads.

 

RWER  Methiness. Comment on ‘Ditch ‘ceteris paribus’! Plus  The answer is: No.  Plus  Ditch it all. Plus  Sloppiness as economic methodology.

 

RWER  Totem, voodoo, and tabu. Comment on ‘Loanable funds.’

 

RWER  The intelligent layperson's guide through vacuonomics. Comment on ‘Consistency and validity is not enough!’  Plus  At the Robinson Line.

 

RWER  From one roadside ditch straight into the other. Comment on ‘Modelling consistency and real world non-coherence in mainstream economics.’  Plus Objective Principles.

 

RWER  Mathiness and the Ur-blunder. Comment on ‘Paul Romer on math masquerading as science.’

OS  From Hilbert’s hotel to Hilbert’s method. Comment on ‘Infinite Debt, Future Generations, and Hilbert’s Hotel.’ See * below.

 

BB  Australian upside-down economics. Comment on ‘Australia wages growth drops to a new record low.’ See * below.

 

EV  No divide. Comment on ‘The Macroeconomic Divide.’

 

WCI  The Humpty Dumpty methodology. Comment on ‘On defining "recession".’

 

OS  How markets work. Comment on ‘Macroeconomic Theory and Operational Reality.’

 

WCI  Worthwhile Canadian filibuster? Comment on ‘On defining "recession".’

 

OS  Unaccountable. Comment on ‘Accounting for ****’ See * below.  Plus  Accounting matters. ICYMI

 

EV  The Hicks drive. Comment on ‘The Sad Death of Free Market Pessimism.’

 

BB  Modern moronomic theory. Comment on ‘Saturday Quiz – August 1, 2015 – answers and discussion.’ See * below.

 

MM  The end of storytelling. Comment on ‘The F story about the Great Inflation.’ Plus  Comment on Blissex of 26th.  Plus  How to save the economy from storytelling economists.  Plus  The Phillips curve as intelligence test.

 

FAZ  Sexit.  Comment on ‘Griechenland-Krise: Deutsche Ökonomen schlagen gegen Krugman zurück.’

 

EV  Here it comes: the sexit. Comment on ‘Freshwater’s Wrong Turn.’  Plus  Watery wish-wash. See * below.

 

MM  From true/false to garbage-wrestling and back.

Comment on ‘Speak for yourself, or why anti-Keynesian views survive.’

 

NEP  Collateral damage. Comment on ‘What Is Helicopter Money, Anyway?’

 

UM  Tricky business. Comment on ‘JKH on the Keynesian Cross and Accounting Identities.’

 

UM  The guessing game. Comment on ‘Repeat after Me: Inflation’s the Cure not the Disease.’  See * below. Second posting. See * below.

 

MM  Around the world: storytelling vs. science. Comment on ‘What is it about German economics?’

 

RWER  Profit (not mathematics) is the key. Comment on ‘The fetishism of mathematics.’

 

RWER  Market blunder. Comment on ‘Economics and the value of art.’

 

RWER  The Big Bang Theory of economics. Comment on ‘Why the ergodic theorem is not applicable in economics.’ Plus  What economics is not about. Plus Science and travesty. Plus  Physics as obsessive windmill. Plus  Einstein, Mill and the Starting Problem. Plus Formal and verbal description of the evolving economy. Plus  No license for drivel. Plus  What scientists in all ages knew. Plus  Answer to the original question. Plus  If anyone has better foundational equations, please come forward.

 

RWER  What you always wanted to know about rent and profit. Comment on 'Bob Solow, Matt Rognlie, Paul Romer, Mason Gaffney, the economic statisticians and rent incomes.’ Plus  Vacuonomics.

 

RWER  The epic ping-pong of empty problem and vacuous solution. Comment on 'Transaction Cost Confusion.’

 

RWER  Freaky games. Comment on 'Coase and Reality.’ Plus  Economics is not what most economists think it is.

 

RWER  From PsySoc to SysHum. Comment on ‘Rational expectations — totally incredible bogus.’

 

RWER  Walrasian double-blunder. Comment on ‘On the irrelevance of general equilibrium theory.’ Plus What are the alternatives? Plus Walras is long gone. Plus  What are Walrasians waiting for? Plus  Troubles with logic?

 

RWER  The insignificance of Gödel's theorem for economics. Comment on ‘Gödel’s theorems and the limits of reason.’ Plus  Rubberneck's reality.

 

RWER  The intelligent student's predicament. Comment on ‘Is there anything worth keeping in standard microeconomics?’

 

RWER  Methodology — Marx, too, messed it up. Comment on ‘On dogmatism in economics.’ Plus Economics vs. Sociology.

 

RWER  MIT dilettantes II. Comment on ‘Bernanke-Summers Debate II: Savings glut, investment shortfall, or Monty Python?’

 

RWER  MIT dilettantes. Comment on ‘The inbred Bernanke-Summers debate on secular stagnation.’

 

RWER  Black holes and white noise. Comment on ‘What’s inside the neoliberal mind? Part 2 — Marketfundamentalist Marxism, kind of.’

 

RWER  Forget Krugman, forget Keynes, forget economists. Comment on ‘Why Paul Krugman is no real Keynesian.’

 

EV  An exercise in futility. Comment on ‘Stability of a Market Economy.’

 

ES  Who said what to whom — and does it matter?

Comment on ‘Keynes "hadn't got round to it".' Plus Why talk about it if it doesn't matter?

 

ES  Sitcom economics. Comment on ‘On Missing Minsky.’

 

Back to Archive 1

Back to Onblog

3

 

RWER  Beyond methodological madness. Comment on ‘On the value of theoretical models in economics.’

 

RWER  Principal problem solved. Comment on ‘The principal problem of Political Economy.’

 

RWER  Economists: stop dreaming and waffling and do your scientific homework. Comment on ‘America can be a full-employment economy once again.’

 

RWER  Complexity, scientific incompetence, and the art of asking the right questions. Comment on Peter Radford's ‘Economic Ignorance?’ See * below.

 

RWER  Yes, Orthodoxy is incoherent but, unfortunately, Heterodoxy also. Comment on Asad Zaman on ‘A perverse intellectual hierarchy.’  See * below.

 

LPS  Framing the economic discourse. Comment on ‘Seven principles to guard you against economics silliness.’

 

LPS  Heterodoxy simply does not apply ergodicity. Comment on ‘Why the ergodic theorem is not applicable in economics.’

 

LPS  Neither truth nor beauty. Comment on ‘Rational expectations — totally incredible bogus.

 

LPS  The synthesis of institution and math. Comment on ‘Wicksell on the use of mathematics in economics.’

 

LPS  Economists kill the economy. Comment on ‘Reality killed the Washington Consensus.’

 

LPS  Unfit in all dimensions. Comment on ‘Models, math and macro.’ See * below.

 

LPS  Mortifying scientific headstands. Comment on ‘The Coase Theorem.’

 

LPS  Science or Circus Maximus? Comment on ‘Economists — arrogant and self-congratulatory autists.’

 

LPS  Methodology — Marx, too, messed it up. Comment on ‘On dogmatism in economics.’ See * below.

 

LPS  Bygones are bygones. Comment on ‘On the irrelevance of general equilibrium theory.’

 

LPS  Angels-on-a-pinpoint scholasticism. Comment on ‘The Bernanke-Summers imbroglio.’

 

LPS  No difference. Comment on ‘What’s the difference between heterodox and orthodox economics?’

 

LPS  Lazy or stupid or both? Comment on ‘Modern macroeconomics — an intellectually lazy ideology.’

 

LPS  Confounding the Quantity Theory and Say's Law. Comment on ‘Money hoarding — an explanation of today’s low inflation.’

 

LPS  As Keynes and my taxi driver said: We simply do not know. Comment on ‘Jon Elster on deductivist modeling leading economics astray.’

 

LPS  From proto-science to science. Comment on ‘What is science?’

 

LPS  New foundations: replacing sand by granite. Comment on ‘Macroeconomic foundations made of sand.’ See * below.

 

LPS  United in the social science delusion. Comment on ‘Microfoundations — contestable incoherence.’

 

LPS  The real limit of Heterodoxy. Comment on 'The real limit of public debt.'

 

LPS  How to solve almost any problem. Comment on 'Lucas’ bridge and the Ricardian equivalence fairy-tale.' See * below.

 

LPS  Multiplying confusion. Comment on 'Abba Lerner on Functional Finance and Ricardian equivalence.'

 

LPS  Nobody understands debt —including the shrinks. Comment on 'Debt myths debunked.' See * below.

 

LPS  The true nature of economists' confusion. Comment on 'The true nature of public debt.'

 

LPS  Better precisely right than roughly wrong. Comment on 'Public debt and Keynes’ paradox of thrift.'

MM  Educating economists? Yes, but where is the scientific stuff? 

Comment on 'Greece and educating economists.'

 

MM  Vacuonomics. Comment on ‘Is the Walrasian Auctioneer microfounded?’

 

MM  Methodology as Force Majeure. Comment on ‘Do not underestimate the power of microfoundations.’

 

MM  Make no mistake: there can be only one true theory. Comment on ‘Received wisdom in macroeconomics.’

 

SW  Vacuonomics II. Comment on ‘A Quick Point on Models.’

 

SW  Going beyond ink-blot association. Comment on ‘Causes and Effects of Wage Growth.’

 

NME  Kaput toys. Comment on Nick Rowe on ‘Wren-Lewis Takes a Stab at It.’

 

NME  Reduced-form bricolage and sticky brains. Comment on ‘Sticky Prices, Financial Frictions, and the Ben Bernanke Puzzle.’

 

SW  Stylized facts and vacuous interpretations. Comment on ‘The IMF on Investment since 2008.’

RWER  Questions and answers about economics. Comment on Peter Radford's ‘I am a know-nothing.’ See * below.

 

RWER  Still in the woods. Comment on 'Money and Say’s law: on the macroeconomic models of Kalecki, Keen, and Marx.'

 

RWER  From false to true. Comment on 'Finding equilibrium.'

 

RWER  Deconfusing confused confusers. Comment on Economic Realism.'  See * below.  Plus:  Stop the Zombie wars. See * below.

RWER  Economists — sloppy, stupid, or scientifically incompetent? Comment on 'Greg Mankiw on loanable funds — so wrong, so wrong.'

 

RWER  Better take the correct formulas. Comment on 'Will the ECB push Europe over the deflation cliff?'

 

RWER  Wanted: The true theory. Comment on 'Economics curriculum reformulation.' See * below.

 

RWER  Beauty or horseshit? Comment on 'On abstraction and idealization in economics.' Plus:  The prophets of wish-wash, ignoramus et ignorabimus, and preemptive vanitization. See * below.

 

RWER  Lost and found. Comment on 'Brad DeLong and the true nature of neoclassical economics.' See * below.

 

RWER  Marshall: a monument of scientific incompetence. Comment on 'Proper use of math in economics.' Plus:  Marshall and some skewed arguments.  Plus: From Marshall to Georgescu-Roegen. Plus: Looking through the veil of historical detail. Plus: No trouble of any sort. Plus: Prophets of Preemptive Vanitization. Plus:  Self-evidence: an urgent update.  Plus: What engine? Plus: Over the cliff. Plus:  Who is afraid of axioms?  Plus:  Still in the woods. See * below.

 

RWER  Comments on 'The failure of economics is due to the use of axiomatic method.'   Plus: Eureka. Plus: Replacing the neoclassical axioms.  Plus: Intermediate summary.  Plus:  Time to get out of limited-horizon economics. See * below.

2

 

LPS  What does a market really look like? Comment on Martin Kullberg on 'Finding equilibrium.'

 

LPS  Who rides the debt-tiger cannot dismount. Comment on 'The Hayekization of modern society.' See * below.

 

LPS  Simply forget it. Comment on 'Finding equilibrium.'

 

LPS  Economists — sloppy, stupid, or scientifically incompetent? Comment on 'Greg Mankiw on loanable funds — so wrong, so wrong.' See * below.

 

LPS  Looking for suitable alternatives. Comment on 'Marginalising Heterodoxy hampers good teaching in economics.' See * below.

 

LPS  Wanted: The true theory. Comment on 'Economics curriculum reformulation.' See * below.

 

LPS  Naive arithmetic. Comment on Jan Milch about 'NAIRU — more religion than science.'

 

LPS  No religion, merely incompetence. Comment on 'NAIRU — more religion than science'

 

LPS  Substandard thinkers. Comment on 'Who is bullshiting who here?'

 

LPS  Beauty or horseshit? Comment on 'On abstraction and idealization in economics.' See * below.

 

LPS  Lost and found.  Comment on 'Brad DeLong and the true nature of neoclassical economics.'

 

LPS  More error than trial. Comment on '”New Keynesian” haiku economics.'

RWER  The unfinished Keynes. Comment on 'The Keynes Solution.' See * below.

 

RWER  Politics vs. Science. Comment on Peter Radford's 'Economics and civil society.'

 

RWER  The pluralism of nonsense is still nonsense. Comment on Geoff Davies's 'Reforming economics: pluralism is not enough.' Plus: Brief answer. Plus:  Only one small point. Plus:  The long shadow of Bentham. Plus:  Same procedure as last time?

 

RWER  Gold-making, wine from water, M-C-M+, perpetuum mobile, free lunch, beating the stock market, and the perennial human dream. Comment on Peter Radford's 'Superior Economists.'

 

RWER  Could economists get their economics right before philoso- phizing about uncertainty? Comment on 'The Ramsey-Keynes dispute.'

 

RWER  Who takes Orthodoxy or Heterodoxy seriously?  Comment on Merijn Knibbe’s 'The real winner: economics which takes money and debt serious.'

 

RWER  Understanding? What understanding? Comment on Dean Baker's 'Seven years after: why this recovery is still a turkey.'

 

ASEPP  Confused confusers. Comment on 'Saving=Investment Fallacy.'  Plus:  No more critique of economics, please!  Plus:  Testing is better than critique. Plus:  All problems settled — free way ahead.

 

RWER  Moral incompetence or scientific incompetence? Comment on 'University economics depart- ments must share the blame.'

 

LPS  Of birds and worms. Comment on '”New Keynesianism” — neat, plausible and wrong.' See * below.

 

LPS  Economists for all seasons or just confused confusers? 

Comment on 'Krugman & Wren-Lewis flim-flamming on heterodox assaults on mainstream economics.' See * below.

 

LPS  Groundhog Day (economics). 

Comment on 'Extraordinarily absurd things called ‘Keynesian’' 

 

LPS  The Profit Law. Comment on 'Ditch marginal productivity theory once and for all.'  See * below.

 

RWER  A failure of reason. Comment on 'Filtering nonsense economics.'

 

RWER  From anything goes to nothing goes right. Comment on Lars Syll's 'Mainstream macroeconomics distorts our understanding of economic reality.' Plus: Scientific thinking:  Aristotle is right, Leijon- hufvud is wrong. Plus:  How to look at reality. Plus: Glory. Plus:  The happy end of distortion.  Plus:  The way ahead. Addendum.  Plus: Manifest distortions. Plus: Intuition. Plus:  Economics is different from psychology / sociology/philosophy. Plus: Science is about facts. Plus:  

Economics — an intelligence test? Plus:  The scientist and the minister: an intelligent answer to a silly question. Plus:  A simple question. Plus:  The end is nigh. Plus:  Yeah, it makes sense. Plus:  Going beyond error and distortion. Plus:  No choice. Plus: Think faster.  Plus: Corrobo-ration and falsification. Plus: No clue. Plus: Update 1. Plus: Methodology. Plus: Axiomatization. Plus: Axiomatization and testing. Plus: Summary.  Plus:  Philosophical consolation. Plus: Update 2. Plus: What economics is all about. Plus:   Towards the new economic paradigm. Plus: Entertainment vs. science. See * below.

 

RWER  Agenda pushers, hijackers, and scientists. Comment on Peter Radford's 'DSGE is a plutocratic tool.' Plus: Start again! 

 

RWER  From theory collapse to economic collapse. Comment on Asad Zaman's 'Why does aggregate demand collapse?' Plus: Comment on Norman L. Roth. Plus: Final comment.

 

RWER  Nonentity: The emptiness of economic thinking. Comment on 'Still dead after all these years — general equilibrium theory.'

 

RWER  Funny folks in the big omnibus. Comment on 'Macro- economic aspirations.'

 

RWER  One thing economists must desperately do: their homework. Comment on Richard Parker's 'Seven things that economists could usefully do or call for over the next several years.'

 

LPS  Total scientific Dadaism. 

Comment on 'Axiomatic economics - total horseshit.' Plus:  From obscurity to enlightenment.

 

LPS  Marshall: a monument of scientific incompetence. Comment on 'Proper use of math in economics.' See * below and alternatively.

 

LPS  What is the core problem of economics? Comment on 'Economics without aspirations.'

 

LPS  Humbleness does not help, but scientific imagination could. Comment on 'The hubris of economics.'

 

LPS  What the 20 top heterodox economists say.

 

LPS  Objection, your Honour! There is objective truth in economics. Granted. Comment on J.B.'s 'Understanding capitalism.'

 

LPS  From anything goes to nothing goes right. Comment on 'Mainstream macroeconomics distorts our understanding of economic reality.' See * below.

 

LPS  Lacking the Midas touch of science. Comment on Paul Pfleiderer's ‘Real world filters and economic models.’

 

LPS  What economists need now — the correct theory. Comment on Paul Davidson.

 

LPS  No idealization, only mis-understanding and misconstrual. Comment on Jeff Madrick’s ‘The Invisible Hand — a brilliant idealization proved wrong by reality.’

 

1

 

LPS  Economists do not solve problems, they are the problem. Comment on Roger Farmer's 'Economists — not mathematics — solve economic problems.' 

 

LPS   Economic theory — as false as ever. Comment on Peter Temin and David Vines's 'Keynes — more important than ever.'  See * below.

 

LPS  The axiomatic method is impeccable. Comment on Alan Kirman's 'Debreu and the Bourbaki delusion of deductive-axiomatic economics.'

 

LPS  You have the data, here is the employment  formula. Comment on Marc Lavoie and Engelbert Stockhammer’s ‘Wage-led growth.’

Plus :  One big sweep. 

 

LPS  The man who missed it by a hair’s breadth. Comment on ‘Kalecki on wage-led growth.’

 

RWER  Throwing soap bubbles at time wasters. Comment on 'Microfounded DSGE models — a total waste of time!' 

 

RWER  Yes, orthodox economics is bad science, but can Heterodoxy raise hope?  Comment on 'Modern macroeconomics and the perils of using ‘Mickey Mouse’ models.'   Plus: Listen to the Econophysicists.

 

RWER  Between the devil and the deep blue sea: On framing false alternatives. Comment on Merijn Knibbe’s ‘The DSGE emperor has no clothes.’

 

LPS  Kalecki got it wrong, Allais got it right. Comment on 'Kalecki and the loanable funds doctrine.'

 

LPS  Kalecki’s definition of profit and income. Comment on Jan Milch’s ‘Great Thinkers in Economics.’

 

LPS  The methodological Keynes. Comment on Victoria Chick and Geoff Tily’s ‘Whose Keynes? Keynes’s Keynes!’

 

LPS  Nonentity: The emptiness of economic thinking. Comment on ‘The concept of long-run equilibrium — a slippery eel.’

 

LPS  It's all in the structural employment equation — end of discussion. Comment on 'The low wages fallacy.' See * below.

 

LPS  NAIRU, wage-led growth, and Samuelson's Dyscalculia. Comment on Roger Farmer's 'NAIRU theory — closer to religion than science.'

 

TNA  Growing debt is bad, but shrinking debt is worse. Comment on 'The first of the great powers to reduce private debt will be the world's next hegemon.' Multiple posts.

 

RWER  Shocking: Methodology is a tricky business. Comment on Peter Radford’s ‘Study the shocks.’

Plus:  Scrap the lot and start again (Joan Robinson).

 

RWER  The profit theory is false since Adam Smith. What can you expect from distribution theory? Comment on RWER #69.

 

RWER  First fundamental law vs. Fundamental theorem of income distribution. Comment on Galbraith's 'Unpacking the first fundamental law.'   PDF  from #69

 

RWER  Out of the box. Summary comment on RWER #69.

 

RWER  Riddle solved; RWER-Bloggers ahead of the crowd. Comment on Nassim Taleb's 'The riddle of induction.'  Plus  Common sense is worse than misleading. Plus: Why J. S. Mill had no friendly word for the bigots and votaries of common sense. Plus: Why Feynman, too, had no friendly word for commonsensers.  Plus: Conclusion.

 

LPS  NAIRU. Comment on ‘Jämviktsarbetslöshet en ‘bra tankeram’? No way!’

 

LPS  The profit theory is false since Adam Smith. What can you expect from distribution theory? Comment on 'Thomas Piketty, Anwar Shaikh and Heather Boushey at The New School.'

 

LPS  Phony riddle solved already by J. S. Mill. Comment on Nassim Taleb's 'The riddle of induction.'

 

LPS  Economics and the roadrunner effect:  The show must go on — who stops is done. Comment on 'Piketty and the non-existence of economic science.'

 

LPS  A perfect scientific vacuum. Comment on Jonathan Schlefer's 'Inequality and the culprit economists over-look — their own wage theory.'

 

LPS  Balderdash or discourse? Comment on 'Lies that economics is built on.'

 

LPS  Where is Sam L. Savage at home? Addendum to the comment on 'Lies that economics is built on.'

 

LPS  Out of the box. Comment on Nick Bunker's 'What’s behind rising wealth inequality?'

 

LPS  Let Post-Keynesianism rest in peace.  Comment on 'Post-Keynesian economics — an introduction.'

 

LPS  A particularly silly critique. Comment on Nick Bunker's 'Piketty and the elasticity of substitution.' 

Plus  The one and only Profit Law and the multitude of unique historical circumstances.

 

RWER-Thread  Pareto-efficiency, Hayek’s marvel, and the invisible executor.

 

TSW  From opinion recycling to real scientific progress. A general comment on the blog's content. See * below.

 

TSW  The profit theory is false since Adam Smith and this includes Marx's profit theory. Comment on 'The Puzzle of Profits.' 

 

EconoPhysics-Discussion  The Path Core as economic Schrödinger equation. Comment on James J. Wayne's 'Fundamental Equation of Economics.' Plus:  Toolism — a strange déjà vu of the third kind. Plus:  Directed randomness instead of indeterminism.

 

EconoPhysics-Discussion  The Canonical Model and good advice from behind the curve.

 

economics e-journal  Comment on Marcel R. de la Fonteijne's 'An Inconsistency in Using Stock Flow Consistency in Modelling the Monetary Profit Paradox.'

 

RWER  Dr. X — conspiracy or failure of reason? 

 

RWER  IS-LM is bad economics. See also the paper 'Mr. Keynes, Prof. Krugman, IS-LM, and the End of Economics as We Know It.' URL

 

RWER  Keynesianism — where are the non-Euclidean axioms?

 

WER-Debate  Neoclassics and the zero point of scientific progress.

 

WER-Debate  The emergence of profit in the monetary circuit.

 

WER-Debate  Utility, mathematical spaces, and Barzilai's unanswered challenge.

 

WER-Debate  Mathematics and the Cambridge tradition of loose verbal reasoning.

 

... flatlined communication                

Economic Logic  

Debate Politics

Axiomatic Economics

 

 *                                                           

All links have been initially checked. In case of a missing link the essential content is easily regained from other parts of this site. See also: Lost and Found

 

 

End of Archive, back to Onblog