July 30, 2021

Occasional Tweets: Economics ― 200+ years of disinfotainment


Occasional Tweets: Because macrofoundations are false, economics is proto-scientific garbage


What is MMT? ― Rectifying Bill Mitchell

Comment on Bill Mitchell on ‘Booming growth in Britain (Brexit?) but child poverty rises (austerity)’

“Social media is, of course, awash with Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and a host of different characters have made it a goal to become MMT proponents, which is a good thing in some respects.”

It is pretty obvious that “MMT proponents” on social media and elsewhere are overwhelmingly agenda-pushers/applause-trolls/useful-idiots/sales-reps and #EconBlockers.#1, #2, #3

“MMT is an economic framework for understanding how the macroeconomy works and the role of the currency-issuer in the monetary economy.”

MMT got macrofoundations wrong. Because of this, the whole analytical superstructure is scientifically worthless.#4

“But MMT is not a ‘movement’, nor, is it a progressive agenda.”

MMTers present themselves as Real Progressives when it suits them, e.g. when they fight UK Labour. Actually, MMT is a movement of and for the Oligarchy.#5, #6, #7

“I keep reading things like ‘MMT advocates taxing the rich’. It doesn’t.”

No, MMT advocates deficit-spending/money-creation which is (because of the 3-sector Profit Law Q≡(G−T)+(I−S)+Yd) to the advantage of the Oligarchy and to the disadvantage of WeThePeople.#8, #9

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Twitter Jul 30


July 29, 2021

Ocassional Tweets: Economists ― crazy or scientifically incompetent?


July 26, 2021

Occasional Tweets: It is no accident that economics has come down to disinfotainment


For more about communication see AXECquery.
For more about the swamp between true and false see AXECquery.

Debunking economists' favorite hallucinations

Comment on J.W. Mason on ‘At Age of Economics: How Should an Economist Be?’*

1. “The most obvious way that economics matters is that it has an enormous prestige in our society. Economists have a level of respect and authority that no other social scientist, arguably no other academic discipline possesses.”Economics is failed/fake science.#1
The prestige it has in society is a result of massive political promotion and not of any genuine scientific merits.#2

2. “It’s also important to realize that economics has come up with some very useful concepts, to make sense of this world around us: concepts like GDP or employment.”
In 200+ years economists did not get the foundational concept of macroeconomic profit right. Because of this, the concept of GDP is provably false.#3

3. “… you’ll find a lot of useful tools within economics.”
The main tools are constrained optimization and supply-demand-equilibrium and both are methodological garbage, i.e. based on untenable axioms.#4 Because the foundations of economics are false the whole analytical superstructure is scientifically worthless.

4. “And to be fair, there are plenty of prominent mainstream macroeconomists who have a lot of interesting and insightful things to say about real economies. The thing is that when they’re talking about the real world, they ignore what they doing their scholarly work.”
That is a euphemism for collective schizophrenia, i.e. of the fact that economists are either stupid or corrupt or both.#5

5. “But it’s almost impossible to imagine a non-ideological economics. … So as long as we live under capitalism, we are never going to have an established scientific study of capitalism.”
From J. W. Mason's and other scientifically incompetent economists' lack of imagination does NOT logically follow that economics cannot move above the level of proto-scientific garbage and political corruption.#6

6. “If you want to think about capitalism as a system, you need to go back to Karl Marx.”
No! Marx was just another scientifically incompetent clown/useful idiot in the political Circus Maximus.#7 If you want to think about the economy you have to move from false microfoundations and false macrofoundations to true macrofoundations.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

Wikimedia AXEC121i

Occasional Tweets: Economics and the Age of Fraud


Occasional Tweets: How the economy works ― the Profit Law


For more about the Profit Law see AXECquery.
Preceding profit explosion.


Wikimedia AXEC143d Profit Law (with increasing complexity) and Balances Equation

Occasional Tweets: Profit explosion


For details of the big picture see cross-references Profit/Distribution.

Occasional Tweets: Behavioral Economics has always been cargo cult science


For more about cargo cult science see AXECquery

July 24, 2021

The three dumbest MMT arguments

Comment on Lars Syll on ‘It’s not the debt we need to fix, stupid! It’s our thinking.’

1. “Can a government go bankrupt? No. You cannot be indebted to yourself.”
The 3-sector Profit Law Q≡(G−T)+(I−S)+Yd implies Public Deficit = Private Profit. So, private financial wealth grows in lockstep with public debt. WeThePeople owes the debt and is taxed for the interest payments to the Oligarchy for an indefinite time. The upper limit for the public debt ― which is in class terms the debt of the working class to the capitalist class ― is given by the interest burden in relation to wage income.#1

2. “Can a central bank go bankrupt? No. A central bank in a monetary sovereign country can always ‘print’ more money.”
Yes, the central bank creates money out of nothing at any time and any amount. There is no technical problem. The economic problem is whether the central bank finances the wage bill of the business sector or whether it finances the government’s direct or indirect purchase of current output. In the latter case, the central bank acts like a counterfeiter who helps the government to redistribute output among WeThePeople.#2

3. “Do taxpayers have to repay government debts? No, at least not as long the debt is incurred in a country’s own currency.”
Public debt can be rolled over for an indefinite time. And for this time it is the interest cash cow of the Oligarchy. However, pushing debt beyond the time horizon does not mean that it vanishes. Central bank money is a specific form of an IOU, i.e. the liability side of the central bank's balance sheet (= money) is equal to the amount of short- or long-term debt on the credit side.#3 It is the defining property of debt that it has eventually to be repaid. So yes, the grandchildren of WeThePeople have to repay the public debt to the grandchildren of the Oligarchy.#3, #4

With deficit-spending/money-creation, i.e. a growing public debt, actual problems are not really solved but merely shifted beyond the time horizon. Ultimately, this is to the advantage of the Oligarchy and to the disadvantage of WeThePeople.

Whether they know it or not does not matter: MMTers in general and Lars Syll, in particular, are just the useful idiots of the Oligarchy.#5 Academic economics is provably false, that is, scientifically worthless.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.

For more about Lars Syll see AXECquery.

July 23, 2021

Economics, communication, disinformation

Comment on Matt Franko on ‘AOC weighs in on “inflation!”’

Economists from Adam Smith/Karl Marx onward claimed to do science. They never did. For 200+ years, economics is failed/fake science.#1, #2

“In order to tell the politicians and practitioners something about causes and best means, the economist needs the true theory or else he has not much more to offer than educated common sense or his personal opinion.” (Stigum) Economists do NOT have the true theory: Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent, and all got macroeconomic profit wrong.

So, economists have NO scientific knowledge but only their worthless personal opinions. As a matter of principle, everybody has the right to his own opinion no matter how stupid, crazy, wrong, or absurd, the only exception is scientists. The ancient Greeks started science with the distinction between doxa (= opinion) and episteme (= knowledge). Scientific knowledge is well-defined by material and formal consistency. Knowledge is established by proof — belief or opinion counts for NOTHING. Economics is provably false.#3

As a matter of principle, scientists do NOT discuss the statements of politicians on scientific matters because politicians have by definition only opinions but no knowledge. Politics and science are mutually exclusive. Only economists who are themselves political agenda pushers discuss the silly pronouncements of politicians on economic matters.

Inflation is a case in point. Of course, what Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says about inflation is political crap. Nobody expects anything else from a politician. However, one expects more from an economist because economists are ― according to their self-presentation since Adam Smith/Karl Marx ― scientists.

The fact of the matter is, though, that what MMTers say about inflation is worth as much as what the member of the United States Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, says: nothing.#4

Economists in general, and MMTers in particular, are NOT scientists but an integral part of a political disinformation exercise.#5

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

#5 Wikimedia AXEC176

Occasional Tweets: MMTers ― stupid or corrupt or both?


For the full-spectrum refutation of MMT see cross-references MMT.
For more about free lunch see AXECquery.
For more about stupid or corrupt or both see AXECquery.

July 21, 2021

Occasional Tweets: The axiomatic stake through the heart of the Quantity Theory


For more about inflation see AXECquery

July 18, 2021

Occasional Tweets: Abusing disaster for pushing the deficit/debt agenda


Occasional Tweets: Applause-trolling does not help ― macrofoundations are provably false


For more about macrofoundations see AXECquery

Occasional Tweet: The deconstruction of supply-demand-equilibrium has long since been done


For more about supply-demand-equilibrium (S-D-E) see AXECorg

July 15, 2021

Occasional Tweets: MMTers ― abusing babies for pushing Wall Street's agenda


Stephanie Kelton

Occasional Tweets: Meet the young economists ― same driveling idiots as the old economists


For more about New Economic Thinking see AXECquery

July 13, 2021

Occasional Tweets: Keynes ― another episode of the ongoing proto-scientific shitshow


For more about Keynesianism see AXECorg

Occasional Tweets: Read Marx ― learn what failed/fake science is


Marxianism, too, is failed/fake science

For more about Karl Marx see AXECquery.
For more about Marxianism see AXECquery.

July 12, 2021

Occasional Tweets: No bright future for stupidity/corruption


Occasional Tweets: How MMTers serve the Oligarchy (II)


For more about don't tax the rich see AXECquery.
For more about stealth taxation of WeThePeople see AXECquery.
For more about how economists/MMTers serve the rich/Oligarchy see AXECquery.

July 11, 2021

Keynes―Marx―Profit: The abysmal scientific failure of economics

Comment on Michael Roberts/Tom Hickey on ‘Marx’s reproduction schema’*

Michael Roberts summarizes: “… for Marx, under capitalism, … investment growth depends on profitability, …” and “for Marx, savings are profits because workers do not save, so there is a class aspect to his reproduction model.”

Tom Hickey cites Keynes: “The Engine which drives Enterprise is not Thrift, but profit.” (Treatise on Money, 1931)

OK folks, and what does profit depend on? The fact of the matter is that neither Marx nor Keynes had any idea of what profit is. And that is rather bad for any economist who claims to do science.#1, #2

The macroeconomic 3-sector Profit Law reads Q≡(G−T)+(I−S)+Yd.#3 This formula tells one, among many other important things, that monetary profit Q depends on investment I.#4 And there you have it: investment depends on profit, and profit depends on investment. In systems theory, this is called a positive feedback loop. And every half-wit knows by now that positive feedback is what destabilizes a system and eventually destroys it. The big insight about Capitalism is that at its heart there is a positive feedback loop. And this explains the economic system's dynamic and crises.

How does MMT fit in? The Profit Law implies Public Deficit (G−T)>0 = Private Profit Q. Thus, the MMT policy of deficit-spending/money-creation is a free lunch for the Oligarchy. While investment i.e. a growing real capital stock is the life elixir of Early Capitalism, growing public debt is the life elixir of Late Capitalism.#5

This, then, is the scandal of 200+ years of economics. Economics is all in one: scientific failure and political fraud because Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT, and Pluralism are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, and materially/formally inconsistent, and ALL got profit wrong.

Because of this, economic policy guidance NEVER has had sound scientific foundations. It has ALWAYS been brain-dead agenda pushing of political clowns. Left-right-center does not matter. Time to bury Marx and Keynes and MMT and all the rest at the Flat-Earth-Cemetery.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

* Michael Roberts blog

Wikimedia AXEC172

July 10, 2021

July 9, 2021

MMTers at the end of their wits

Comment on Bill Mitchell on ‘Intergenerational Report ― the past is catching up with the government and the game is up’*

Bill Mitchell comments the 2021 Intergenerational Report as follows: ridiculous, smokescreen-creating, jam-packed with scaremongering, latest nonsense, madness, designed to deflect the damage that the government surpluses were creating in the mid-1990s, embarrassing for Treasury workers to be coerced by their bosses into producing this garbage.” and “What parades as economic analysis is just the usual neo-liberal mainstream nonsense that currency-issuing governments have run out of money and fiscal deficits are dangerous.” and “We have also seen that the government can spend what it likes without taxes going up and without bond markets declaring the government insolvent. We have now lived with large deficits as a result of the pandemic and the game is up on the deficits are bad and the sky will crash down story line.“

All this, of course, is not a scientifically valid argument but desperate political shit throwing. As such it is just another example of the abysmal level of academic economics. To this day, economists are too stupid for the elementary algebra of macroeconomics.#1

MMT has been refuted by the proof of its inconsistency. Because the foundational concepts of MMT are false the whole analytical superstructure of MMT is scientifically worthless.#2 That is, MMT's policy guidance has NO sound scientific foundations. It is just political agenda pushing for the benefit of the Oligarchy. The claim that MMT policy is for the benefit of WeThePeople is a political fraud.#3

MMTers debate every crappy argument that comes their way but have never attempted to refute the proof of the inconsistency of the MMT sectoral balances equation.#4

MMT is refuted on all counts and a sure sign that MMTers are at the end of their wits is that all that they do is to repeat their thoroughly refuted silly slogans of the harmlessness of a continuously growing public debt.#5

It is a mathematical certainty that the macroeconomic Profit Law implies Public Deficit = Private Profit. By the same token, it is a political certainty that MMTers are agenda-pushers for the Oligarchy and false Friends-of-the-People.

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke

* Bill Mitchell's blog
#3 For details of the big picture see cross-references MMT

Wikimedia AXEC118d

July 8, 2021

Occasional Tweets: Economics is and has always been fake science


Occasional Tweets: Economists ― the dumbest excuse for scientific failure ever



For more about failure see AXECquery.

Occasional Tweets: Economists are too stupid for science


How the Intelligent Non-Economist Can Refute Every Economist Hands Down → SSRN 

July 6, 2021

Occasional Tweets: The Cambridge School of consistent scientific failure


For more about the Cambridge School see AXECquery

July 4, 2021

Occasional Tweets: How to think like an economist ― a program for mental self-mutilation


For details of the big picture see cross-references Scientific Incompetence.

July 3, 2021

Occasional Tweets: If this is the top, how does the bottom look like?


 Economists ― stupid or corrupt or both?

For more about Lars Syll see AXECquery.
For more about the vacuous proclamation of top economists see AXECquery.