Re: Equilibrium Questions
From: julietta carpentieri (potato_at_newsguy.com)
Date: 02/23/05
- Next message: myal: "Re: Home Depot Courts Hispanics (Partners With La Raza To Hire 20,000 "Spanish-Speaking" Workers)"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Argentina defaults on 140 bln debt yet economy booms!"
- In reply to: smithaa02: "Re: Equilibrium Questions"
- Next in thread: Zerge: "Re: Equilibrium Questions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:46:31 -0600
I actually did find this interesting. Sounds like you are trying to
stir the pot and get a battle of the brains going here!
Good luck
j
On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:14:28 -0800, smithaa02 <noreply@spamthis.com>
wrote:
>Equilibrium theory is founded on contradictions. The division of labor
> and other units of property does exists, but does not interact in the
>fashion economists describe. Since the division of labor is a product
>of co-dependence, it is absurd to assign indepedent variables to its
>ratio of exchange as economists have in their silly little formulas.
>Economists cluelessly ignore this and try to use price to define price.
>
>If collectively I and another can produce 2 more widgets, there is no
>objective mechanism that says I will get 1.2 as opposed to .7 or any
>other share ratio of those 2 extra widgets.
>
>The economist assigns a random ratio of this increment of association to
>get his story problem to work. In this fashion they skirt the issue of
>coming up with real life independent economic variables, by making them
>up, thereby defining price with price.
>
>There is no objective price theory as economists describe. Instead
>price is a product of inherently unstable haggling and alliances between
>parties to experience the extremes of self-sufficiency and individually
>obtaining the full fruit of the increment of association. The weapon of
>choice for all parties is then the ability to withdraw or strike their
>services or contributions in order to obtain a higher ratio of the fruit
>of the division of labor.
>
>This leads to economy where individuals can only survive by periodically
>sabatoging (business cycles) the economy in order to increase their
>bargainning power and personal wealth.
>
>Hope you found that interesting :)
>
>julietta carpentieri wrote:
>>...
- Next message: myal: "Re: Home Depot Courts Hispanics (Partners With La Raza To Hire 20,000 "Spanish-Speaking" Workers)"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Argentina defaults on 140 bln debt yet economy booms!"
- In reply to: smithaa02: "Re: Equilibrium Questions"
- Next in thread: Zerge: "Re: Equilibrium Questions"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|