By Clarence Norr.
First I want to say HAY HOW SHE GO DERE to all my pards! Many tanks to yous dat got me all those free beers at Randy’s Grand Slam after I crooned da “Green Green Grass at Home” at karaoke there, eh.
So here we are up to our necks in horse s#it because too many gomers borrowed more dan dey could afford to pay back, combined wit lenders who lent out way more dan dey had to lend. What a rigmarole, eh!
Most all of da media excellentays got two groups to blame da whole ball a wax on - borrowers who can't afford to repay and lenders who lent unprofitably. Da fix word is "regulation" as we supposedly go forward. Lately dat self described Einstein “Bernanke” has been harpin’ on his knees to be made head guy of lending and borrowing.. Dat’s just da truth I’m telling,’ to bad if ya don’t like it.
Da above stuff aint da root cause of da problem and tings will get pretty much worse for most Americans if da government rummies or even more worse, da private international bankers at dat Federal Reservation, have da main say and regulatory powers in da private economy.
So, eh.. what is da root cause you ask dis expert?
Da root cause is da money system itself there. Da moola, da dough, you bet.
No more green could be legally lent out den what was kept in da vaults at da banks if we had a legal gold and silver based money set up, eh. If banks did lend out more den they were worth they would be committing fraud. So banks would be far more careful lending out their own gold, and dat of their depositor’s den they are these days lending out our same dollar labor credits over and over again.
Dis means prices in da economy would remain stable because of not being able to inflate da currency.
Stable pricing would mean borrowers would be more likely to repay their loans. So den da market would regulate itself like it had right up ‘til 1913. After 1913 we started having nationwide booms followed by recessions or depressions dat (interestingly) corresponded wit inflation and deflation of da bucks in circulation. DUH?
First I want to say HAY HOW SHE GO DERE to all my pards! Many tanks to yous dat got me all those free beers at Randy’s Grand Slam after I crooned da “Green Green Grass at Home” at karaoke there, eh.
So here we are up to our necks in horse s#it because too many gomers borrowed more dan dey could afford to pay back, combined wit lenders who lent out way more dan dey had to lend. What a rigmarole, eh!
Most all of da media excellentays got two groups to blame da whole ball a wax on - borrowers who can't afford to repay and lenders who lent unprofitably. Da fix word is "regulation" as we supposedly go forward. Lately dat self described Einstein “Bernanke” has been harpin’ on his knees to be made head guy of lending and borrowing.. Dat’s just da truth I’m telling,’ to bad if ya don’t like it.
Da above stuff aint da root cause of da problem and tings will get pretty much worse for most Americans if da government rummies or even more worse, da private international bankers at dat Federal Reservation, have da main say and regulatory powers in da private economy.
So, eh.. what is da root cause you ask dis expert?
Da root cause is da money system itself there. Da moola, da dough, you bet.
No more green could be legally lent out den what was kept in da vaults at da banks if we had a legal gold and silver based money set up, eh. If banks did lend out more den they were worth they would be committing fraud. So banks would be far more careful lending out their own gold, and dat of their depositor’s den they are these days lending out our same dollar labor credits over and over again.
Dis means prices in da economy would remain stable because of not being able to inflate da currency.
Stable pricing would mean borrowers would be more likely to repay their loans. So den da market would regulate itself like it had right up ‘til 1913. After 1913 we started having nationwide booms followed by recessions or depressions dat (interestingly) corresponded wit inflation and deflation of da bucks in circulation. DUH?
 Clarence Norr | My easy solution right off da bat is dat you rummies should study ‘til you understand Mathematical Economics. Dis refers to da use of mathematical methods to ape economic theories and analyze da wrongs posed in economics. Da formulation and derivation of key relationships in a theory make tings pop wit generality, rigor, clarity and makes stuff more simpler, eh. Dis math stuff lets economists form testable propositions about complex subjects that can’t be more betterly expressed informally. So, dis language of math will let yous make tings more clearer and specific. You’ll also see more clearly positive claims about contentious tings dat would be impossible otherwise. |
Study these simple economic models I slapped together for yous. You’ll be learnt stylized and simple mathematical relationships dat will clarify any assumptions and implications.
 |  |
| Equilibrium quantities as a solution to two reaction functions in Cournot duopoly. Each reaction ting is expressed as a linear equation dependent wit da quantity demanded. | An Edgeworth box displaying da contract curve of an economy wit two participants. Referred to as da "core" of da economy in modern parlance, there are infinitely a pretty lot of solutions along da curve for economies wit two participants. |
 |  |
| Da surface of da Volatility smile is a 3-D surface where da current market implied volatility (Z-axis) for all da options on da underlier is plotted against strike price and time to maturity (X & Y-axes). | Da IS/LM model is a Keynesian macroeconomic model designed to make predictions about da intersection of "real" economic activity (yah know, spending, income, savings rates, eh) and decisions made in da financial markets (Money supply and Liquidity preference). Da model is no longer widely learnt at da graduate level but is common in undergraduate macroeconomics courses. |
Last ting to keep in mind, eh, don’t let those gomers play wit ya when they say dat da use of formal mathematical techniques projects a scientific exactness dat don’t appropriately account for informational limitations in da real world. Dat rummy Hayek contended dat!
Dat other piece a cake “Karl Popper” taught dat da fundamental problem wit mathematical economics was dat it was tautological. What da dummy meant was, once economics became a mathematical discipline, it would cease to rely on empirical truth and instead rely on axiomatic proof. WHAT A SIMPLE S#IT!
Dese gomers got there heads deep up their butts, eh. Study da stuff I learnt ya and before ya know it, tings will be honky dory again I bet cha.
Dere ya go, eh! See yous at Da Slam!
Dat other piece a cake “Karl Popper” taught dat da fundamental problem wit mathematical economics was dat it was tautological. What da dummy meant was, once economics became a mathematical discipline, it would cease to rely on empirical truth and instead rely on axiomatic proof. WHAT A SIMPLE S#IT!
Dese gomers got there heads deep up their butts, eh. Study da stuff I learnt ya and before ya know it, tings will be honky dory again I bet cha.
Dere ya go, eh! See yous at Da Slam!
No comments:
Post a Comment