[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 27 KB, 667x1000, 41epcB4aM8L._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22154159 No.22154159 [Reply] [Original]

*completely obliterates mainstream economics in your path*

>> No.22154167

qrd?

>> No.22154199

>>22154159
Go to bed Bichler and stop advertising.

>> No.22154609

>economics

a fake discipline, nothing to obliterate except the overweight careers of some tenured chicago academics

>> No.22154982

>>22154167
not op but it has a lot to do with the cambridge capital controversy, basically what economists are quantifying and plopping into equations don't actually make any coherent sense e.g. think about corporate stock and corporations owning physical assets, "goodwill", etc... when you do national accounting that publicly traded stock is owned by someone besides the corporation as an asset and wealth on their balance sheet but isn't it just an ownership claim on those corporate assets/future revenue stream (which is all "salesmanship" and bullshit wishful thinking of course) which is also something counted separately so you're doing all kinds of double accounting and you have the issue that the inputs and outputs having the same variables on both sides of the equation in ways that can't work and etc, etc

>> No.22155496

>>22154609
>Economics is... LE FAKE

Typical seethe

>> No.22155540

>>22154159
>atheist tries to think
>cant stop using the word power

yep into the trash

>> No.22156578
File: 61 KB, 600x803, 1679108269947786.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22156578

>>22154159
How so? Sounds interesting. Can you tell us more about it?

>> No.22156580

>>22154982
Sounds kind of like Michael Hudson's discussion of "fictitious capital." Interesting.

>> No.22156983

>>22156580
Hudson and OP both are fans of Thorstein Veblen so there's overlap. Anyways the term "fictitious capital" is Marxist in origins and OP attacks Marx as well as marginalism. The claim is both theories of "capital" are wrong so you can't demarcate anything "real" and "fictitious " in the way Marx does obviously, imagined future revenue is as capitalizable and spendable today as "real" shiny gold bars... the liability structure of capitalism won't "collapse" in the way Marx thought it "should"

>>22156578
I read this long ago, essentially it's an attack on marginal utility and labour theories of value... Veblen said it all a long time ago... here's an interview that summarizes:
https://bnarchives.yorku.ca/640/4/20200600_bn_the_casp_approach_invited_then_rejected_interview_web.htm

>> No.22156985

>>22155540
Lmao, typical take from a religious cuck

>> No.22157023

>>22155540
>Theistfag tries to think
>Seethes about the concept of "power"