Does Anyone Need Proof?

prooflogoLately it has become fashionable to say that a certain amount of inflation is good. Is that so? It doesn’t need to be true in order to be a useful comment. As long as it I said by someone with a PHD in economics, it is taken as a pillar of truth. Said by a Federal Reserve Open Market Committee member it is deemed absolute gospel.

Oddly, only rank armatures are ever asked to prove anything. The more credentials a person has in the modern world the less obliged he is to use the scientific method or to use verifiable experiments. Suppose an engineer designed an airplane and declared that it was safe just because he says it is safe? That doesn’t happen because folks can see the results the hard sciences generate. Economists don’t have that problem because it is so hard to relate personal experiences to government policy. The public still hasn’t figured out that they are being robbed blind.

I have to confess, I don’t attempt to prove anything I come up with. But, I am not doing experiments. I am making observations. I declare constantly that people’s behavior in the political system is determined by herding and other instincts. Can I prove this? That is like asking a weatherman to prove that it is raining. How does one know it is raining? One can look out the window.

With respect to human instinctive behavior, all one need do is look out the window and observe.

00_logo_1

This entry was posted in Daily Comments and tagged , , , , on by .

About Fantasy Free Economics

James Quillian independent scholar,free market economist,and teacher of natural law. Who is James Quillian? Certainly I am nobody special, Just a tireless academic and deep thinker. Besides that, I have broken the code with respect to economics and political science. Credentials? Nothing you would be impressed with. I am not a household name. It is hard to become famous writing that virtually no one in the country is genuinely not in touch with reality. But, if I did not do that, there would be no point in my broking the broken the code. If you read the blog, it is easy to see that there are just a few charts, no math and no quantitative analysis. That is not by accident. Given what I know, those items are completely useless. I do turn out to be highly adept at applying natural law. Natural law has predominance over any principles the social science comes up. By virtue of understanding natural law, I can debunk, in just a few sentences , any theory that calls for intervention by a government. My taking the time to understand the ins and outs of Keynes General Theory is about like expecting a chemistry student to completely grasp all that the alchemists of the middle ages thought they understood in efforts to turn base metals into goal. Keynesian theory clearly calls for complete objectivity. Government can only make political decisions. Keynesian techniques call for economic decisions. So, why go any further with that? Fantasy Free Economics is in a sense a lot like technical analysis. Technical analysis began with the premise that it was impossible to gain enough information studying fundamentals to gain a trading advantage. Study the behavior of investors instead. Unlike technical analysis, I don't use technical charts. What I understand are the incentives of different people and entities active in the economics arena. For example, there is no such thing as an incentive to serve with life in the aggregate. In the aggregate, only self interest applies. It is routinely assumed otherwise. That is highly unappealing. But, I am sorry. That is the way it is. I can accept that because I am genuinely in touch with reality. Step one in using Fantasy Free Economics is for me to understand just how little I really know. A highly credentialed economist may know 100 times what I do based on the standard dogma. Compare the knowledge each of us has compared to all there is to know and we both look like we know nothing at all. There is always more than we don't know than what we do know. I am humble enough to present myself on that basis. Why? That is the way it is. I am not bad at math. I have taught math. What I understand is when to use it and when to rely on something else. Math is useless in natural law so I don't use it. While others look at numbers, I am busy understanding the forces in nature that makes their numbers what they are. That gives me a clear advantage.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.