Good evening professor, I've been trying to find minsky news everywhere, I'd like to ask you how is it going. I've found a website that says last uploaded version back in 2013. I'd like to ask you if you're continuing the project on your own or if you have given up. I'm very determined to mathematicalize and softwarize economics to achieve the ultimate simulator. I hope you get to read this comment. Thanks professor.
So "Banks create money" is a shorthand. Really it's either someone wanting something they do not have money for, or a business using advertising or other tricks to convince people they need something they cannot pay for, or mob psychology pressures to get the latest widget, which induces people to get a loan/credit. So supply & demand both create money in this sense, and the banks facilitate, the banks allow money to be created. Is that right?
It seems to me like Treasury officials could use a tool like Minsky to qualitatively understand changes in debt and unemployment, and use Minksy to apply realistic monetary theory, either by tax or debt cancellation + job guarantee programs, to pretty much make unemployment vanish, and to also reduce wealth inequality. Isn't that political economics nirvana? So well done Prof Keen. Hyman Minsky might have seen nirvana, but you've provided the engine to drive us there. Now we just need one country to show all the others you can get there with such an engine. I'd f___king love that to be New Zealand before you Aussies! LOL!!
I also suspect the economy couldn't easily accommodate private investment if not for the private creation of money, but so far I haven't created an entirely solid argument for this.
Doesn't a lot of this slot nicely together with Werner's Quantity Theory of Credit Creation? I would say you two very much sing from the same hymn sheet! It'll never not amaze me how guys like you and him (actual economic thinkers) get sidelined in favour of those that are already part of the cult-like school of CB-style monetary policy (kind of a frankenstein of neoclassical and New-Keynesian theory, with a dash of Friedman)
Both Steve Keen and Richard Warner are courageous as well as rigorously realistic. A defunct and discredited orthodoxy clings to the top of a rotten tower along with the bankers, insurance parasites, lobbyists, and war profiteers. We have the technology to live so well. The delusion which Steve dispels is preventing us from sharing the planet gently.
I would dispute that capitalism has the strongest tendency to innovation. In its younger, competitive phase, it is very encouraging to innovation, but in its older, sclerotic monopoly-imperialist phase, it is increasingly an obstruction to parallel thinking and to any innovation that occurs outside the established pattern of intellectual property. Completely new innovations that are not merely tweaks on the existing technology and are not under the control of the existing big players represent a threat to existing investments and are fought tooth and nail.
Happy to see another video out thankyou
Good evening professor, I've been trying to find minsky news everywhere, I'd like to ask you how is it going. I've found a website that says last uploaded version back in 2013. I'd like to ask you if you're continuing the project on your own or if you have given up. I'm very determined to mathematicalize and softwarize economics to achieve the ultimate simulator. I hope you get to read this comment. Thanks professor.
It's on Sourceforge sourceforge.net/projects/minsky/. Anything but giving up, but funding is scarce for something useful like this in economics.
The Keynes bancor plan is politically impossible. There's no way such discipline can be practically apply worldwide
So "Banks create money" is a shorthand. Really it's either someone wanting something they do not have money for, or a business using advertising or other tricks to convince people they need something they cannot pay for, or mob psychology pressures to get the latest widget, which induces people to get a loan/credit. So supply & demand both create money in this sense, and the banks facilitate, the banks allow money to be created. Is that right?
It seems to me like Treasury officials could use a tool like Minsky to qualitatively understand changes in debt and unemployment, and use Minksy to apply realistic monetary theory, either by tax or debt cancellation + job guarantee programs, to pretty much make unemployment vanish, and to also reduce wealth inequality. Isn't that political economics nirvana? So well done Prof Keen. Hyman Minsky might have seen nirvana, but you've provided the engine to drive us there. Now we just need one country to show all the others you can get there with such an engine. I'd f___king love that to be New Zealand before you Aussies! LOL!!
I also suspect the economy couldn't easily accommodate private investment if not for the private creation of money, but so far I haven't created an entirely solid argument for this.
Doesn't a lot of this slot nicely together with Werner's Quantity Theory of Credit Creation? I would say you two very much sing from the same hymn sheet! It'll never not amaze me how guys like you and him (actual economic thinkers) get sidelined in favour of those that are already part of the cult-like school of CB-style monetary policy (kind of a frankenstein of neoclassical and New-Keynesian theory, with a dash of Friedman)
Both Steve Keen and Richard Warner are courageous as well as rigorously realistic. A defunct and discredited orthodoxy clings to the top of a rotten tower along with the bankers, insurance parasites, lobbyists, and war profiteers. We have the technology to live so well. The delusion which Steve dispels is preventing us from sharing the planet gently.
I would dispute that capitalism has the strongest tendency to innovation. In its younger, competitive phase, it is very encouraging to innovation, but in its older, sclerotic monopoly-imperialist phase, it is increasingly an obstruction to parallel thinking and to any innovation that occurs outside the established pattern of intellectual property. Completely new innovations that are not merely tweaks on the existing technology and are not under the control of the existing big players represent a threat to existing investments and are fought tooth and nail.
Too bad the presentation is full of rants about mistakes I never learned and dont care to hear about. A good15 min of great material in there.