>Max Sawicky wrote, > >>Without getting immersed >>up in the Flow of Funds stuff, the inescapable >>fact is that, as Doug says, NIPA savings trends >>do not support the BBB(Baby Boom Bulge) theory. > >Whenever I hear tell of an "inescapable fact", I suspect a retreat from reasoned argument into dogma. . . . > Perhaps so. Or perhaps it just knocks the stuffing out of your premise. >>Financial bubbles have an autonomous character, >>relative to individual and corporate decisions >>on the amount of income and receipts, respectively, >>not to spend. > >That's an intriguing tease, Max. My last message argued that the metaphor of the bubble is inapplicable precisely because of its autonomy from subjective time preference for money and risk aversion.> I agree with the words after "because", but I don't see a metaphor problem. Bubbles filled with animal spirits and prone to random gyrations float on the sea of the real economy. A metaphor problem is that when they burst, the effects on the economy defy the characterization.
