The Cost of Doing the Right Thing

We have heard it said that cutting government spending at this juncture would knock percentage points off of GDP. So, despite the fact that borrowing at our current rate is unsustainable it is said that borrowing and spending must continue until the economy strengthened.
Among Washington intellectuals this kind of reasoning makes sense. The rest of us are free to see it differently. Most importantly, deficit spending and cheap money do not cause economic growth. Never in the history of the world has deficit spending caused an economic expansion.
Those of us who follow natural law, know that the time to do the right thing is the very moment the right thing to do is known. At any given moment, it appears that a cut back in government will be bad for the economy. That is because human behavior is assumed to be constant. A mind that is trained to consider only packaged ideas assumes people will not adjust in positive ways and incentives do not change. Government control of economic activity is assumed to create certainty but in economic matters certainty doesn’t exist. What is acquired is only a perceived certainty.
In a free market setting no effort is made to create certainty. It is assumed that all market participants will put their personal resources to their highest and best use and they always do.
Free markets accept uncertainty as constant and normal. With that comes optimum employment and incomes. What is important to remember is that when government tries to create certainty success is only imaginary. Uncertainty remains no matter what so we might as well let people have their liberty with free markets and high living standards.

This entry was posted in Daily Comments 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.