We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

Mr Congdon said the dominant voices in US policy-making – Nobel laureates Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz, as well as Mr Summers and Fed chair Ben Bernanke – are all Keynesians of different stripes who “despise traditional monetary theory and have a religious aversion to any mention of the quantity of money”

- This is the, er, money quote, so to speak, from an article by the erratic Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, quoting Tim Congdon

11 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • RRS

    It may be more usefull to consider various forms of “money” and “money flows” as something more like the blood of an organic body.

    These historic analyses of attempts to determine the amounts of blood in the system, based on what shall be deemed to constutute “blood” (i.e., money supply) can mislead.

    Circulation is no doubt essential, provided it carries oxygen, nutrients, etc to the appropriate points required by the body economic.

    Guess what is missing in these analyses based on “money supply.”

  • Laird

    I’m not following your analogy, RRS. What “nutrients” is it that the money supply is supposed to be carrying to the body economic?

  • Axis Mundi

    What “nutrients” is it that the money supply is supposed to be carrying to the body economic?

    Information

  • Laird

    Sorry, I must be having a slow day, but I still don’t get it. What “information” is the money supply supposed to be carrying that it isn’t?

  • Axis Mundi

    What “information” is the money supply supposed to be carrying that it isn’t?

    Money is not “information” any more than letters are literature. Money is what is commonly used to discover how things are valued.

  • Laird

    Axis, I don’t think you understand either RRS’s post or my question about it. I asked what “content” (different word here, for clarity) he thinks the money supply is supposed to be “carrying”; you replied “information”; and when I asked what type of information you said that money isn’t information. Well, duh. That’s neither insightful nor responsive.

  • Axis Mundi

    Ah, I see. Sorry, I apologise for your lack of clarity then. And your manners as well.

  • Laird

    Your apologies are accepted. Now, care to post a meaningful reply to my question?

  • Axis Mundi

    Why? You are clearly a churl so I will leave you to figure it out yourself.

  • Laird

    OK. I’m a churl and you are incapable of rational expression. I ask reasonable questions and you post unapologetic drivel. This is pointless. Have a nice day.

  • Paul Marks

    I am not a fan of Tim Congdon – indeed I first started to attack him when I still had a full head of hair.

    However, he is quite correct about this one.