Zeroing in the Guns

I wanted to write on this Piece today so badly that my bones ached, but I came to realize that I would sound like a stupid dork in the land of Wonks. The real problem with the Real Business Cycle has always been that both Keynesians and the advocates of the RBC want to consider the economic failures as an Accounting problem. This comes from their implicit assumption that Booms are normal, and Busts are deviant; any other ideation would require Growth to become detrimental at some extreme. Such a Conceptualism could even hazard that Economists and their labor could somewhere become inimical. I would not go that far, yet I might proclaim that Booms were basically deviant in their own right, and any Push applied to the economy as stimulus is basically wrong; as it elevates an artificial condition to a misappropriation in the balance of the economy. I always remember the famous military axiom of building your fortification below the crest of the hill. Anyway, read with care, especially this link.

Simon Johnson thinks that the Fed should lead the Charge up San Juan Hill again, but I think the Troops are too disorganized to attack the bastions of the Banking industry. The Banks protected themselves during the Crisis, not their Debtors, Creditors, Stockholders, or the economy itself. They are now posed for expansion through the areas where smaller Banks failed. They are ready, but look around and ask what happened to their business. They are back to being willing to loan Money, but there are no Applicants who are willing to accept their doctrine of full repayment at extreme Interest rates; no Risk accepted. The Banks are insisting on the Profits of a Boom, with the Risk-taking of a Bust. The Banks are bound to fail naturally, because they will likely receive the Profits of a Bust, their hesitancy developing any Risk into the Risk-taking of a Boom.

I read this link, and had some real Thoughts of derision. I have just spent a Week listening to Everyone extol the vast wealth that the new series of Cell-phones are going to generate. There have been vast proclamations of huge Sales of the Product; still, Cell-phones are a fad product attaining great levels of desertion as soon as a new phone hits the market. Any Company which plans to sell more than a half-million of any specific unit of Cell-phone may be orchestrating their own doom. I would prefer an organizational structure which could provide cheap Cell service–some relatively cheap monthly service with Worldwide service–and upgrade of phone units upon request at some sensibly-priced fee. You can whip a struggling horse to some advantage, but don’t use a Club; it leads to further deterioration of effort. lgl