Wednesday, April 16, 2014

1959 US Fed Review Of 1957 UK Radcliff Committee Report On Monetarism vs Fiat Currency Operations. Fascinating reading.

   (Commentary posted by Roger Erickson)




Interesting parts commence half way down page 2, with curiously emphasized statements about what "the American, for example, KNOWS ... ."

There is far too much to comment on, so feel free to discuss. To me, the overall point seems to be that the presumptive rule of monetarism - and importance of bankers & plutocrats of the day - was abjectly disproved by experiences during the WWII years, then began to mount a furious backlash ... and is now once again seemingly dead & relegated to the second-level bleachers, even if it's defendants refuse to recognize that it no longer commands or deserves a 1st-class ticket at the policy-development forum. In fact, the banking & economic professions need to get the heck out of the way.

Closest parallel I can immediately think of in biology is oxygen tension across the capillary/tissue gradient in all parts of the body. Yes, oxygen tension affects oxygen diffusion & utilization, but appropriate countermeasures (capillary size, permeability, various "globin" molecules as transport & storage carriers [even fetal/adult subtypes of hemoglobin], and various tissue-specific catalyst factors that affect oxygen release from carrier molecules) .... all serve to allow oxygen demand (credit?) to smooth out & buffer the absolute magnitude of the "price" of delivering oxygen to different tissues.

In any system, if a given process is necessary, even if not sufficient, for aggregate system function & evolution .....then marginal return on process execution is a secondary - NOT a primary - factor for system operation. A way will be found, regardless of price.

Nevertheless, it's as if we have a irrelevant argument between bankers (the lungs) & other citizens (the other tissue types) over who "runs" the circulatory system, and entire physiology.  I've got news for the "banker-lungs" ..... there's this overwhelming concept, labelled "necessary but not sufficient" ..... . 

So the bankers claim of taking on godlike importance is grossly oversold. Careful, or we'll just replace you with a mobile phone app. The other humans are getting impatient. Banking functions may be necessary, but bankers as is sure as hell aren't sufficient anymore.



3 comments:

Roger Erickson said...

ps: other writings of Sam Katz are listed here

http://www.econbiz.de/Search/Results?lookfor=%22Katz%2C+Samuel+I.%22&type=Author&limit=20

circuit said...

Nice find.

Interestingly, the last paragraph has an example of how taxes can "finance" expenditures "by curtailing consumption and freeing up resources for expanding government investment". This is essentially how taxes in real terms finance federal spending.

Roger Erickson said...

Circuit,
Isn't it a travesty that updated versions of how evolving currency operations actually work ... aren't taught to all students by age 10?

As it is, +90% of citizens flat out don't believe anything near the actual truth. It's near too late to re-educate the bulk of the electorate at this point.

We could make this a whole lot easier ... just by starting earlier.