Uncle Milt, I think, was looking for an alternative action by central government in response to Keynes. He was Free To Choose for everything except central banking. How does one make that distinction?
I guess the alternative question is, are we stuck with the money we use? The concept of money illusion is that money, once a monopoly, is difficult to replace, so central bankers are free to manipulate bank accounting, forcing whatever level of dollars on us they choose. Monetarists forget that money goes through the assembly line, like any other good. The money channel is broken up from long to short, bug chunks to smaller.
Worse than Uncle Milt and Money Socialism, are the Keynesians, however, they are even less observant about government and how it operates. The government doing something that theoretically would result in a positive outcome is bad thinking for an economists. The better thought process is what theory would government prove out, making government the object of science. Keynes only theory of government, it seems to me, is that government should do what his group of people want in time of recession. Hardly a sound theory of government.
The real issue facing us are the little robots that appear on our screen, the widgets. These little two dimensional thinkers are eager to replace us in many menial tasks. These widgets are the antithesis of central government, destroyers of central government. The technologies are not stopped by the Great Exogenous.
Pretty soon we are going to have money widgets, widgets that can hold our promise to work hard tomorrow for a hamburger today. Imagine that, a widget that catches us in the act of cheating and no longer let's us grab the hamburger. Can we create it, the completely secure widget?
No comments:
Post a Comment