The Curajus State

A reader here (sorry, name has passed me by) unkindly sent me a copy of The Courageous State. I have managed to stagger through the introduction. In which I find this:

“Although economics seems never to have recognised that we are empathic beings.”

The classic description of empathy of course being Adam Smith in Theory of Moral Sentiments. We twist and turn when watching the walker upon the rope as if it is our own body up there….etc, etc.

Look, checking what he’s got wrong today is a fun way of exercising the brain for a minute or two. But reading three whole book’s worth of this shit (yes, there’s a third on the way) is expensive. I ain’t doing it for less than £40k. About 6 month’s worth of what he gets for producing this crap.

It’s not just that he’s a moron, it’s that he’s an ignorant moron.

“Neoliberal economics assumes that there is nothing that markets do not know, and therefore nothing that they have not already built into the prices that they charge”

Nope. Neoliberal, in fact entirely conventional, economics, assumes that that which is known is included into prices. What is unknown is what changes prices as it becomes known.

An ignorant fucking moron, or should that be fucking ignorant moron?

Nope, sorry, I ain’t paid to deal with this shit. I will maximise my potential, as Ritchie would put it, or maximise my utility as every one else would put it, by observing that worrying pimple on the backside of my dog instead.

Jeebus but the man’s stupid.

16 thoughts on “The Curajus State”

  1. Doesn’t he just mean that agents in standard mainstream economic models have entirely self regarding preferences and sometimes assume perfect information too? That mist be what he’s getting at.

    Of course he has overlooked that since abut 1960 economics has been obsessed with imperfect information, because he never bothers looking.

    There is some work with others regarding preferences etc. But it’s still fringe. Becuase it’s not so often useful.

  2. No, that mustn’t be what he’s getting at. Read the damn book. I am not parodying him nor misquoting him. He really is that damn ignorant.

  3. “…we are empathic beings.”
    So, beneath the carapace of his egotism, the Murphatollah feels for others? His capacity for self-delusion is extraordinary.

  4. I am afraid I am the guilty man here Tim – hope I haven’t caused you to get too annoyed! I have read the thing in its entirety for my sins – I would advise taking on the third section because it contains the most obvious doozies in bite size form but one problem I ran into fisking the text was that there was simply too many basic errors to make it possible to debunk him in less than at a cursory estimate five volumes. I haven’t yet got my teeth into the ‘Joy of Tax’ yet.

    Couple of points – Firstly, a particularly mischievous friend of mine who actually knows the man bought me these books as Xmas presents so I am not directly contributing to his financial well being!

    I think this is what crowdfunding was invented for – let’s get the necessary funds together – I’m willing to chip in – anyone better knowledgeable than me willing to start a web appeal – I think it can be achieved…..

  5. I read a book from Joe Stiglitz (can’t remember what it was called) which went almost exactly along the same lines. I just spent the entire book highlighting paragraphs which were patently wrong – or used overly-emotional terms, such as ‘theft’ or ‘seized wealth’ when referring to selling people shit they have presumably bought with their own free will.

    I can remember thinking, fuck me, this guy has a noble prize in economics!?

    And, of course, every time I read some Guardian type cunt quoting him, it’s always prefaced with ‘noble prize winner’…

  6. VP
    Be careful. Sending turds through letter boxes does get old bill to follow the case because, unless I am mistaken, the GPO has a right to be a co-prosecutor. (In the UK; don’t know the rules in the low cuntries.)

  7. I’ve read some of the JoT, the free bits that come up in Google books. It’s hilarious. The bit at the end where he gives a budget speech I can just picture the jumped up twat standing at home delivering it to itself.

    https://books.google.com.hk/books?id=1GaZBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT141&lpg=PT141&dq=the+joy+of+tax&source=bl&ots=sJWh0wHkep&sig=Rt1R4euDbyCW_IFaNQwKjpcrplM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi21MzS4cnMAhVJW5QKHd1-DYA4ChDoAQgyMAI#v=onepage&q=the%20joy%20of%20tax&f=false

  8. He is stupid but his readers are more stupid. So long as he states things with enough certainty and uses enough long words/namechecks enough actual economists they don’t give a shit – he’s pushing at their open door and showering them in jizz.

  9. Bloke in Malta

    “I can remember thinking, fuck me, this guy has a noble prize in economics!?”

    I thought the same thing reading one of Krugman’s book in which he seemed to have completely deleted the 1970’s from history.

  10. Interested

    “He is stupid but his readers are more stupid. So long as he states things with enough certainty and uses enough long words/namechecks enough actual economists they don’t give a shit – he’s pushing at their open door and showering them in jizz.”

    Very true. The same can be said for Rich Dad, Poor Dad, a pile of steaming horse crap that sells by the boat load.

  11. The Meissen Bison

    Sorry to hear about that pimple on your dog’s rear, Tim, and I quite agree with your priorities.

  12. “Neoliberal economics assumes that there is nothing that markets do not know, and therefore nothing that they have not already built into the prices that they charge”

    There is actually a second mistake in this short sentence. Conventional economics (including A-level and first year undergraduate) does indeed recognise that there is known information that does not get reflected in the price. These are ‘externalities’ and probably 20% of first year undergraduate time is spent analysing them.

  13. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Noel Scoper: wonderful image. I can just see him practising it in a mirror. Brings to mind this. Brrrrusssellls sprrrroutts!!

  14. Tim, I know hundreds of professional economists and I don’t think I’ve ever read anyone make this point more cleanly:

    [Economics] “assumes that that which is known is included into prices. What is unknown is what changes prices as it becomes known.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *