william the wie
Gold Member
- Nov 18, 2009
- 16,667
- 2,402
- 280
This is a relatively new book dealing with the mess that is current macro-economics. I want to start out by saying that it strikes me as oversimplified but that may be a result of popularization. Here are the first three supercycle laws
The initial stimulus behind the supercycle is the arrival of a monetary standard that promises price stability.
What gets the supercycle moving and then keeps it in motion are misalignments in relative prices.
Relative price misalignments produce positive effects only when they move from back to front. (the back refers to raw materials, the front to final consumption.)
The one thing I like about this proposed general theory is that it is testable and falsifiable because it deals with the world economy as interlocking logistical networks that follows raw materials being transformed in steps into finished goods which are then consumed. What I don't like about it is that little or no attention is paid to demographics and life-cycle spending habits.
Way back when both Modigliani and Friedman proposed somewhat different life-cycle expenditure patterns. When in the 1980s the commerce department collected data on life cycle expenditures different pictures emerged: a two generation cycle popularized by HS Dent jr. and a more complex four generation spending cycle popularized by the late William Strauss and the still living Neil Howe. According to biologists all living creatures are striving to gain the most genetic income four generations out so the Strauss and Howe model should be more nearly correct but the Dent model is easier to work with. This is my biggest objection to this proposed General theory, it rejects biology as the prime mover in human behavior. But I was wondering what other proposed general theories of economics are also out there to replace the failed system now in place?
The initial stimulus behind the supercycle is the arrival of a monetary standard that promises price stability.
What gets the supercycle moving and then keeps it in motion are misalignments in relative prices.
Relative price misalignments produce positive effects only when they move from back to front. (the back refers to raw materials, the front to final consumption.)
The one thing I like about this proposed general theory is that it is testable and falsifiable because it deals with the world economy as interlocking logistical networks that follows raw materials being transformed in steps into finished goods which are then consumed. What I don't like about it is that little or no attention is paid to demographics and life-cycle spending habits.
Way back when both Modigliani and Friedman proposed somewhat different life-cycle expenditure patterns. When in the 1980s the commerce department collected data on life cycle expenditures different pictures emerged: a two generation cycle popularized by HS Dent jr. and a more complex four generation spending cycle popularized by the late William Strauss and the still living Neil Howe. According to biologists all living creatures are striving to gain the most genetic income four generations out so the Strauss and Howe model should be more nearly correct but the Dent model is easier to work with. This is my biggest objection to this proposed General theory, it rejects biology as the prime mover in human behavior. But I was wondering what other proposed general theories of economics are also out there to replace the failed system now in place?
