Economics: the Voice of Authority

Who will put together the Agenda for Action? It is reasonable to assume that economists would play an influential- if not dominant- role in doing so. After all, economics is said to be a science. But is it? Let's take a look...

237 years ago, in 1776, the ruling class was not too thrilled with the positing of a moral and fair Labour Theory of Value- championed by Adam Smith in his "Wealth of Nations"- as being the foundation for a modern-day economics...
But not to worry. 100 years later Leon Walras, in his 1874 "Elements of Pure Economics", pioneered the development of General Equilibrium Theory (GET); and put forward a Marginal Theory of Value. But there were problems with these theories.
GET posits set conditions which will inevitably yeild the expected results. But the resulting (non-existent) 'self-balancing' market thrives only under conditions of 'pure and perfect' competition. Although this may look good 'on paper' nothing in the Real Economy can be understood in terms of such a model.

Marignal theoreticians attempt- again, by way of equations- to derive a determinate system. But the determinateness of the mathematical constructs so derived do not express a determinateness that corresponds to the Real World.
GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM THEORY
?
MARGINAL THEORY
OF VALUE

?




-But who cares whether such theories work or not? That's not the point. The point is that the ruling class were delighted, because Walras's work SHIFTED the spotlight from the rights of workers to favouring ruling class interests... Such 'theories' not only trumped Market over Labour, but presented economics as a science.
Believe it or not, nothing much has changed since then...
...Paul Samuelson's "Foundations of Economic Analysis" (1947) not only presented economics as a science, but as a branch of applied mathematics! Not surprisingly, he won the Nobel Prize for his work in 1970. But here, too, one sees an insistence on idealized marginal value theory that posits the false premise of a 'pure and perfect' market.


What is Economics?
In fact, 'Economics' has managed to stand science on its head- and gotten away with it! Quite a feat, when one considers that economists act as the Voice of Authority in almost every area of our economy.

But the fact remains: rather than basing mathematical calculations on real-world conditions, contemporary economists base 'reality' on mathematical calculations! Economists who do not follow this lead are themselves 'marginalized', their road to academic advancement often blocked. Which is to say: the teaching of alternative models has been effectively squeezed out of our university halls and lecture rooms!
William Krehm, in "Price in a Mixed Economy" (1975): '...the idealized logic of the profit motive...presented in marginalist terms...has been hailed as a triumph of scientific analysis-- the bringing of everything under a single, blessed, and general law-- like gravitation, relativity, or quantum theory.'

WHO CAN ARGUE WITH THAT?

You see the problem. When structuring an Agenda for Action, one must be wary of infinitesimal calculii and exponential 'derivatives'.

We see the results of such contrived 'financial instruments' revealed in the housing and stock markets.

All of a sudden disaster strikes, and then everyone-including economists- wonders why. One wonders if we're ever going to 'get it right'.

Counterfeit Economics

A starting point may well be NAMING our poison: a prevailing 'economics' which by any other name is a counterfiet economics attempting to pass for the real thing: our Real (Earth) Economy.

An economics which views production pollutants as 'externalities' to the cost of production in effect denies the existence of the Real World- and, therefore, the Real Economy. NAME our contemporary economics: it is a counterfiet economics.