Dear Lord the man’s a fool

Neoclassical economics is built on the assumptions of microeconomics that say that all government activity is a market aberration and therefore to be minimised.

There simply isn’t anything at all in neoclassical economics which says that all government activity is a market aberration. Nor that it must be minimised. It’s simply not there at all.

Now, if you were to say neoliberal then perhaps you might be getting somewhere. But neoclassical economics is just a result of the marginalist revolution. Given that MMT accords with that basic idea, to look to the margins, it’s also neoclassical economics.

Note that he’s also trying to insist that Keynesianism is neoclassical, which it is, but then that it regards government activity as something to be minimised. That would be a hell of a surprise to Keynes.

20 comments on “Dear Lord the man’s a fool

  1. ‘Neo’ is Latin for evil. And it sounds a bit like a siren if you say it over and over.

    So if you put neo in front of anything, you’ve got a free hand to say whatever you like about what it means.

  2. Slightly O/T but from a commenter in his blog –
    “That’s one of the reasons for tax – to generate enough unemployed to create a pool of available people who are able to do jobs in the public interest.”
    What? We use tax to drive people into to unemployment. Seriously.
    I don’t really know where to begin with this. However, nor does Spud cos he hasn’t corrected it.

  3. Jimmers

    Great spoof comment, give that man whoever it was a smartie. When you consdier the average calibre of those employed in the public interest…

  4. Tim – i sometimes think Captain potato is just trolling you – he surely can’t believe half the rubbish that he spews out, but then again i am probably wrong- he’s just pandering to his brain dead acolytes who are happy to lap up his promise of unicorns for everyone and bugger the consequences.

    Alternatively he’s just a know nothing cunt.

  5. It’s one of the standing disagreements around here. Is he a moderately intelligent lefty who is exploiting the wider lefty community by publishing rubbish they really want to believe for miserable lucre?

    Or is he a screaming nutcase (hi, DBC) who actually believes the utter bollocks that he writes?

    We differ in our opinions.

  6. We make the mistake in thinking he is commenting on the real world, when in reality it all takes place under his fevered sweating brow.

  7. Keynes was, by his own admission in his letters, a pederast. This can not be stated often enough to those who hold him high regard.

    He also, as far as I know, had no offspring so joins the likes of Macron, Merkell, May and Gillard as someone with a large influence on the future and zero personal investment in it.

  8. Don’t forget eugenicist as well, Mr Ockham. We shouldn’t hide any portion of his radiant light under a bushel.

  9. Eugenics was the trendy Progressive cause in the ‘thirties. Mysteriously you don’t hear much about that part these days.

  10. I think his problem is his sheer isolation over a long time. I get the impression he hasn’t mixed much with people in the rough and tumble of working life for a long period.

    This leads him to the Paradox of Chesterton’s gate. He sees a problem, then genuinely believes he is the first one to have to think it through from first principles. He isn’t around enough people to know that some of these things have been thought about for others, and there are sometimes good reasons things are as they are. Maybe those reasons are obsolete, but he should at least know what they are.

    His little spat with Sarah Mark last week is an example. He can’t possibly think there is a good reason why we don’t exclude bidders from procurements for tax reasons without a conviction. He’s just not aware that other people have thought about the issue.

    Before I was banned, I used to tease him about getting a job in the public sector. Wouldn’t touch it. I think he’s frightened of working in an office.

  11. William

    There are videos of him grandstanding at Holyrood Finance Committee meetings. In one of these Jackie Baillie (Labour MSP) makes rather a fool of him and he ends up being rather sidelined for the rest of the proceedings. I don’t have a link, sorry.

  12. William o O

    I gave up watching Question Time yonks ago but I’d definitely not want to miss it if he were on the panel.

  13. Thanks for sharing that VP – delicious. I’d forgotten how brittle and nasty Murphy came over when Brillo had him. The Scottish Parliament appearance is equally squeamish.

  14. Thanks for the links.

    Christ, he’s even more supercilious and arrogant in real life than in writing.

    How is that even possible?

    He must have really reached the pinacle of his profession to be that assured of the truth of his conviction.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.