Veblen believed economics needed to become and evolutionary science and was well into scientists and anthropologists. There's lots of debate from 1885 to 1930 that makes us look antediluvian. There's an academic site that might interest you Nom - http://wer.worldeconomicsassociation.org/index - you can genuinely sign up for free. I'm sure you could handle most of the papers or get back to me for elucidation (i.e. being told I don't know either!) They are mostly people who think cleaning society up starts with stringing the banksters to lamp-posts.
On 26 Feb, 22:12, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Vebklen.. I took your cue and got one of his books.... (forgot the title > now).... interesting... I got to the part about the "leisure" of the ruling > class , back in the medieval (and before) old days.....I like what I > read... looking to get into it further, when I get time .... reads a lot > like anthropology (of economics?)....I read a lot of similar stuff as > literature "chivalric" or courtier stuff.... odes and lengthy epic poems, > and the like.... > As to the Italian election, I saw briefly that Berlusconi may have played > the spoiler... didn't win but might force some sort of coalition.... > voanews.com/content/coalition-looks-likely-in-italy/1610836.html > > I don't know if I told you... a long time ago I dubbed him "Burlesque-oni" > .....now he seems to have some "professional competition".....Beppe > Grillo....Beppe is short for Giuseppe... Joseph....one of the more > endearing Italian nicknames..... don't know anything about him or his > politics.....has to be better than Burlesque-oni, though....In an odd way, > I think a fellow like Beppe was required to compete with and top the antics > of Ruby-boy. > Maybe he and the other parties can make something work, coalition-wise.... > > I don't know if it's a good idea to wish for a similar political fate (in > characters) as Italy, for England....Scatter-brained, is the way I describe > Italian politics... everyone's just off in some political or ideological > world of their own....Italian "popular" culture... TV, media and the like > is very dumbed down... It's as if the "party-life" is a social > requirement... otherwise, Italians are and can be as "intelligent" as other > Europeans in all professional fields....but like I said, it seems that > social acceptance demands a certain "zany" public comity....ever hear about > Commedia Dell' Arte?.....Italians like to "behave" as though they live > it.... HAR > > http://italian.about.com/library/weekly/aa110800a.htm > > I truly would like to see them put on their serious faces for a long > while....there's a definite "genius" there... > > Returning to England, I'd like to see you/her prosper, too....not too > shabby when it comes to "genius" yourselves.... act like it.... > > > > > > > > On Monday, February 25, 2013 12:37:35 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > We have the odd 'unscheduled' election here - usually when there isn't > > much of a government majority. Can't see that this time, though there > > is a small chance if the Tories think they can win and smash their > > Liberal partners - who are at a low in he polls and in the middle of a > > sex scandal. I'd like to see the rise of a comedy party as in Italy. > > > I suppose, in the context of 'epistemology' we are driven to talk as > > in our engagement because nothing rational seems to work. I've been > > reading a lot recently on Veblen and a big debate either side of 1900 > > on economics as an evolutionary science - there's a lot of current > > academic chatter on much the same. There was a lot of work on > > democratic foreign policy back then too. I'm afraid the process > > (though interesting) only reinforces my view that argument is > > pointless in changing much. My hope lies in technology - maybe the > > real difference between us and primitive societies is that we drive > > cars etc. I used to do computerised installations in manufacturing > > and the real difficulties were overcoming various interests from the > > shopfloor up. At the time, back in the 80's, we thought a lot of > > professional work would be routinised, even done away with, through > > expert systems. In fact, 'professionalism' has burgeoned. Taking a > > guess, I think financialisation - thought of as the 'creation' of all > > the 'assets' in shadow banking and such, is just a way to keep all > > this going, including funding war machines. > > > Some say the only real innovation in financial services is the ATM - I > > tend to agree. We don't seem to have the guts to take this system on. > > > On 25 Feb, 15:52, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Financial ruin... or other sorts, thereof....usually tends to get the > > > "folks" out in the streets.....I keep saying( I know, it gets > > repetitive) > > > ....But it just seems to be the way..... like you, it appears to me also > > > that talk or reasoning just will not work with people who are stubbornly > > > set in their ways.....Two-by-four off the side of the head.... that's > > the > > > only language a jackass understands... HAR... (unfortunately)....What > > are > > > the prospects of some sort of early election process for England (under > > > English Parliamentary process)?, I think I read that regularly scheduled > > > elections for you aren't until 2015.... that's a ways , in time..... > > > > Over here the federal government is facing "sequestration" on March 1, > > > 2013.... > > > >http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mo-sequestration-economists-sur... > > > > The majority of "pundit" wisdom.... be it "professional economist' or > > just > > > "political"... sees to say that the "cuts" will NOT be avoided and that > > > they will NOT have much appreciable effect in slowing down the already > > weak > > > economic recovery here in the U.S.....The U.S. version of "austerity"... > > > pushed by the Conservatives (Republicans) over here as well...... > > > > Jackasses... in my view....the stats. show that the U.S. economy is > > > already close to being in another "defined" recession stage.....I think > > > this "push" will likely do it.... another recession coming soon....if > > these > > > "cuts" stand... but the Conservatives call it "scare tactics"......I > > wonder > > > if they're willing to put a "bullet" on that bet?.....Nah, they're just > > > blowhards... Piss-pants cowardly pissants, I call 'em.... HAR > > > > On Sunday, February 24, 2013 10:42:10 AM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > > > I honestly don't know what can be done Nom - we need honest finance > > > > and markets but have no chance of getting them with our corrupt > > > > politics. Finance is essentially a power play and as such not > > > > amenable to reason, though it pretends to be. We need to collapse the > > > > banks to a utility and productive investment function (so called > > > > primitive banking called for by Stiglitz) and bring in simple > > > > accounting rules to prevent companies being looted from within. This > > > > is all a simple matter in principle but made highly complex in order > > > > that the crooked system can be retained. I think we probably are at > > > > one of those stages where the royalty need to be deposed. I'd have a > > > > leveling to wipe out personal debt and a job guarantee initially > > > > linked to national-international service projects. But there is no > > > > point - they will take us into war instead. > > > > > On Feb 23, 9:18 pm, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > PPS... definitely... off with Cameron /Osborne heads..... HAR..... > > >http://www.iaindale.com/posts/2013/02/23/the-loss-of-aaa-is-a-mild-na...... > > > > > > Where's Oliver Cromwell when you need him...... > > > > > > On Saturday, February 23, 2013 12:36:35 PM UTC-5, nominal9 wrote: > > > > > > > PS... Archytas...I read the article linked below about "austerity" > > in > > > > > > London (England generally).... sounds "Dickensian"....worse (not > > so, > > > > > > maudlin... but "factual").... time to lop off some Tory heads, I > > > > say....Can > > > > > > you blame (me) them? > > >http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/02/23/can_england_be_saved_cou... > > > > > > > On Thursday, February 21, 2013 8:28:52 PM UTC-5, archytas wrote: > > > > > > >> There's a fair paper by michael hudson - > > > > > >>http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue55/Hudson255.pdf > > > > > >> - which shows there is very articulate criticism that economics > > > > starts > > > > > >> in the wrong place. > > > > > > >> On 21 Feb, 23:26, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> > Well done mate (HAR{copyright Nom}. I often like to get cruder > > n > > > > > >> > thinking. If the US has $100 and UK £100 and he exchange rate > > is 1 > > > > : > > > > > >> > 1 if both sides print an extra thousand each both the dollar > > and > > > > pound > > > > > >> > haven't changed in reciprocal value. But there is extra money > > > > about > > > > > >> > and the main question is who gets this - if everyone gets the > > same > > > > > >> > share nothing has changed - if you and I had 10 units each > > before > > > > and > > > > > >> > now had double etc. We'd still have 10% of each domain's > > currency. > > > > > >> > But if we get zilch (as usual) we only have 5% after the > > printing. > > > > > >> > Even then, if the extra 1000 in each currency doubled > > production > > > > and > > > > > >> > prices didn't rise but fell by half owing to a jump in > > productivity > > > > > >> > we'd be twice as well off. This model has limits but is the > > > > essential > > > > > >> > idea. Instead, the extra money has been going into > > > > financialisation > > > > > >> > and we are being screwed. Even at this simplistic level it's > > not > > > > that > > > > > >> > simple as our assets may inflate in price - maybe our goats, > > wives > > > > and > > > > > >> > other chattels inflate to twice the old price We really need a > > > > > >> > spreadsheet - economics is full of them, but they quickly get > > very > > > > > >> > over-complicated. In science we'd throw them out as based on > > the > > > > > >> > wrong premises. All economic models contain sweeping power > > > > relations. > > > > > > >> > I agree with your question on raising all countries out of > > poverty > > > > > >> > relations - but economics dismisses this and allows no such > > > > > >> > questioning. Even without thinking about the third > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
