Digital in all things!

Macroeconomics fails of Insight in the current Crisis, according to this Post. Many come up with rationales, but all seem to be a little too insignificant to bring on the level of distortions. I don’t study these models myself, because Booms are all different, Recessions are all different, and transitions from Booms to Busts are all different. I also have a theory about the magnitudes of an Economy, believing that massive deviation of capital investment will radically alter the manner which an economy will react to things like Stimulus, Inflation, the Money Supply, and Resource Costs alterations. A large Ship is much slower to respond to the Wheel than is a smaller vessel, and economies are perhaps the most massive vessels in existence. There is also the fact that any model in which 4 or more Inputs vary drastically will inform as much as Toilet Paper. The only good thing about Macroeconomcs consists of there being only a likely half-dozen outcomes for any Issue, so Most of Us can maintain a 20% Average in forecasting.

I bring up this Post, because it has links to interesting elements, and David is brave enough to risk jogging on Texas roads in early morning; exactly when previous night Drunks are racing for Work. I will believe in Deflation when I see it–a probable never–and cannot integrate How it could possibly be damaging, if lasting less than 2 years. I do dread an ingrained Inflation propelled by injected amounts of Cash from Fed and Treasury. The Fed says it can sell Treasuries fast enough to slow Inflation when it appears, but it will not appear in Treasuries’ pricing. It more general form is in Resource prices, and I don’t understand How the Fed is going to convince the Investment world to buy Treasuries rather restock their Inventories. A Stitch in Time–but hey, We already dropped about 30 Stitches.

Nouriel Roubini has been predicting averse economic results for as long as I have known of him. He can find a half-empty glass, even when there has been a little overflow. The trouble is that he is always so close to Right, but not really there. The law of probabilities suggest that he must get it right on the money soon; so We can all congratulate him on nailing it. He states Recovery may be a U, but more likely will be a W. My greatest fear is the belief that it might be a Internet Recovery of www. This monotonous crap may haunt the next decade. lgl