This justifies it? How?
-
No, there is a slight difference. GBP does not rely on belief, it relies on the liability of its issuer. The issuer is legally bound to deliver on its value. As a holder of GBP you have a claim on the issuer. As a holder of BTC you have a claim on no one, you are on your own.
It's a liability until it isn't. The U.S. et. al. had legal liabilities to pay on their gold and silver notes until they decided they didn't. Lehmann did until they went bankrupt. Etc. The vast majority of macroeconomics is central bank ideology parading as science.
-
-
It's a fair point that much of economics fell victim to "physics envy" in the 20th century and tried to present itself as a science that discovers universal laws, even though its conclusions are limited by society's reflexivity. But that limitation applies to all social sciences.
-
That macro theory only works when stringent assumptions are met doesn't make it worthless. But it's important to be aware of the historical & cultural specifities of one's models. Attempting to eliminate them entirely probably results in models that are too abstract to be useful.
-
Amazing that you needed two tweets to say absolutely nothing of interest.
-
Amazing that you read two tweets and entirely failed to understand them.
-
Bit early for you to be drinking again isn’t it Frances?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Nick your posts are always excellent, is your work available anywhere in audio format so I can listen to it on my commute?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'd go further: all macroeconomics is ideology parading as science
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.