thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 10:04am:



It is not 'pure unbridled invisible hand' if it can be manipulated and regulated, is it?  The entire field of economics is about it NOT being invisible at all.

You are talking rot. Confused, foggy rot.

The scandinavians achieved what they did not 'somehow' but because of strong social cohesion and solidarity. Consensus of free individuals who agree to be governemd in a particular way because they trust each other.


Tell us about checks and balances under the CCP's "consensus by appointed cadres and apparatchiks" system.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 12:53pm:

Adam Smith published his "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" in 1776, two months before the American Declaration of independence. The invisible hand is not a policy or a blueprint and certainly not a 'driving force'.  As with everything else, you completely misunderstand it, being a totally unlettered, ignorant propaganda bot,  yet you blather about it incessantly.  It is a metaphor, mentioned only ONCE, in relation to imports:

Chapter II: On Restraints upon the Importation from Foreign Countries of such Goods as can be produced at Home

But the annual revenue of every society is always precisely equal to the exchangeable value of the whole annual produce of its industry, or rather is precisely the same thing with that exchangeable value. As every individual, therefore, endeavours as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the public good. It is an affectation, indeed, not very common among merchants, and very few words need be employed in dissuading them from it.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/smith-adam/works/wealth-of-nations/bo...



Yes, there is high taxation in Scandinavia. How does that contradict in any way what I said about the consensus and social solidarity of free individuals electing their governments?

Market signals are not metaphorical. The invisible hand is a metaphor. There is no actual hand, invisible or otherwise.


The Invisible Hand is a metaphor introduced by Adam Smith (1723-1790) to represent how people pursuing their own selfish ends nevertheless make such choices as contribute to the social good.


You do understand the idea of a metaphor?

Frank wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 4:54pm:


Indeed, the operations of the free market which Smith promoted and described, used the metaphor of 'the invisible hand' to describe/explain the outcome of the efforts of all the naturally competitve and self-interested individuals, in the market.

ie, the 'individual hands' in the market, in  total = the market's 'invisible hand'.

As already noted,  such markets are obsolete in the modern globalized economy; the complexity of production today means we need government intervention and planning, to achieve the 'public good'. 

Quote:


Yes.

Quote:


Yes, but his book is a barrier to good economics today, as noted above. The 'invisible hand' (a metaphor) must be overseen by government planning, given today's complex production chain, eg, an individual  boot-maker competing in a market to make boots no longer exists, international companies controlling  machines do.

Mainstream economists haven't woken up yet, they are still deluded by the obsolete concept of scarcity in the face of unlimited wants.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2024 at 8:34am:



https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/

https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/

EVERY government, state and federal has a planning aspect for its own field.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/world-bank-share-more-data-attract-private-inves...

World Bank to share more data to attract private investors to developing countries

"But he said more progress was needed, and the bank was taking action on a number of fronts to overcome barriers holding back private sector investment to developing economies.

Economic growth has slowed in developing countries, with growth falling to barely 4% from 6% in two decades, Banga said, noting that each lost percentage point dragged 100 million people into poverty, while (government) debt levels were rising"..

.....

A pity the World Bank doesn't ban currency-issuing governments from borrowing money at all; rather such governments  must face their economies' RESOURCE constraints, and choose policies consistent with those resource constraints.

And to avoid disasters like this:

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_BRI(2023)753938

Argentina's debt restructuring and economy ahead of the 2023 elections

Sovereign debt has been a longstanding challenge for Argentina's governments. As recently as 2022, Argentinian President Alberto Fernandez secured an outline deal with the IMF to restructure US$44.5 billion of debt from a record 2018 bailout. In fact, since 2001, Argentina has defaulted on its international sovereign debt three times –the first time in December 2001 in the midst of a very serious financial crisis, in 2014, in the middle of a battle against holdout creditors and again in 2020, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the same period, Argentina has gone through two debt restructurings. One that lasted from 2005 to 2016, and one that started in 2020 and was agreed much faster. After the 2005-2016 restructuring experience, Argentina implemented two of the lessons learned: (i) the use of collective action clauses in the 2005 and 2016 indenture bonds, and (ii) taking a faster approach to the restructuring process, in both the opening of negotiations with creditors and the formulation of an acceptable proposal. In addition, during the 2020 restructuring, Argentina chose initially to adopt two controversial measures to circumvent collective action clauses, it changed course and managed to complete the restructuring of the desired amount. These actions, along with other economic policy decisions, allowed the country to avoid a crisis similar to that of 2001, despite the challenging global economic environment. In 2022, the country's economy went through multiple shocks, i.e. the ramifications of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as well as a persistent drought that damaged its crops and exports. The situation persisted in 2023, with an increase in inflation and a depletion of dollar reserves, which added to the government's woes. Even if a crisis is averted, economic considerations will play a critical role in the general elections due to take place in October 2023. While it is too early to say that Argentina will not again find itself in need of restructuring in the near future, experts suggest that the country has learned some lessons from these processes,  with regard both to negotiating with creditors and to managing its debt and the legal innovations that can protect it. This could help it manage such processes more efficiently and without the associated economic and social costs.

....

The authors are fools; Argentina is crippled by unrepayable government debt, and any attempt to repay the debt will only increase social costs measured in entrenched and increasing poverty.

Lesson: no currency-issuing government should borrow money; the task of such governments is to know the nation's productive capacity, and to mobilize the nation's resources accordingly, while funding the essentials for all citizens (housing and jobs) in conjunction with the profit-seeking private sector - including private investors who the World Bank seems to think it needs to encourage "private sector investment to developing economies".

Frank wrote on Mar 25^th, 2024 at 11:48am:


Tell its creditors to f**k off, they willingly made what turned out to be a bad investment.

Then set about mobilizing its own considerable resources for the benefit of all its citizens.

Requiring a socialist government which is cognizant of MMT......