The Democrats are talking about capitalism

The former mayor says it has to be "democratic".  People who "feel the Berne" tend toward socialism.

"Thinking about Capitalism" is one of my favorite Great Courses.

Jerry Z. Muller says in Lecture 1 “…capitalism is too important and complex a subject to be left to economists because it involves a great deal more…" Muller delivers a balanced historical economic perspective interspersed with incisive insight. If you want to know "how we got here", this is the course.

Old Democrats liked John Maynard Keynes (1883-1946) who died decades before his theory was misapplied.

There are many reasons to take this course. First, it is a huge time saver. Having tried to understand the historical realities behind Marx’s thinking or to deal with the huge run on sentences of Hayek, the tight cohesive summaries in this course amaze. Second, it is a huge source of economic pearls.

Third, what we see as reality today was often predicted by the sheer genius of of over 100 years ago. Read why Burke predicted political radicalization in L11, Moser predicted massive social disenfranchisement in L12, and de Tocqueville noted “This taste for material well-being…coupled with a social state…" is characterized by individualism that “...leads to loneliness..." Hegel predicted civil servant control of the economy in L13 (ask your hair dresser about what they go through to get a licence).

Fourth, if you have questions about why things are the way they are, here are the answers. Your questions will differ from mine, so this is just a sample: Where did the culture of “me” come from? See Thomas Hobbes and Voltaire. Yet Rousseau predicted that Voltaire’s consumption would produce “happy slaves" to luxury, poor citizenship, rampant usury, vanity, and a massive wealth gap. Well, that sounds familiar! In 1900, George Simmel identified “individuals whose identities were formed by belonging simultaneously to multiple cultural and social circles". For those of us who don’t understand where our kids are now, read L19.

Where did big government and moral relativism really get started? See the moral philosopher Adam Smith’s master virtue of “self control" was to be groomed through compliance with current marketing aided by governmental oversight. This produced a form of economic “self control" now recognized as an ever-changing moral relativism based on who is in control of market oversight. Yet he stumbled a bit on a source for the “greater virtues” of bravery and fortitude without which a country could not defend itself. Job-hopping and modern disenfranchisement with impersonal corporations…see Schumpeter.

Pornography in schools? See Herbert Marcuse of the German Marxist Frankfurt School [the same school that influenced our own Chicago School and the National Education Association] in 1964 as he argues, “erotic instincts…were being repressed…far more than was necessary". Thus concluding, he goal became to “influence students”.

What caused the death of deferred gratification on which capitalism depends? See Daniel Bell.

Why do our largest newspapers concentrate on economic jabs instead of bipartisan solutions? To quote Schumpeter: “argument in favor of capitalism was too difficult for many people to grasp.”

What could the welfare state, Popes Leo XIII, Pius XI, social gospel Protestants; and secular economics have in common? See John Maynard Keynes.

How so very small groups control today’s societal direction? See Mancur Olson.

There is so much more. Don’t miss that while Keynes promoted governmental deficit “under certain conditions” he called for repayment when times are good. So why, during the last business cycle when the economy has risen nearly asymptotically, has Federal debt not been repaid but rather itself become asymptotic itself? Since Keynes felt that deficits were only valid when capitalism was not producing jobs, the idea of not repaying deficits when unemployment is zero is contradictory to Keynes but compatible with Buchanan’s analysis of a politician bias toward deficit-spending to satisfy an expectant public.

It seems that Murphy himself recognized the immense amount of material he covers and in lecture 36 he provides a framework for course review by dividing his chapters into topics based on recognized tensions between capitalism and…the state, self-interest, the individual, democracy, and the community. This clear course summary also provides a sense of flow of the foundations for modern economic arguments and counter-arguments. It is well worth your time.

Things

Charles Krauthammer started as a liberal.  Over three decades, he evolved into “the most influential conservative commentator.”  In his book, THINGS THAT MATTER, I counted 88 entries. The book’s subtitle is “Three Decades of Passions, Pastimes and Politics.”  The population should be of the order of 3x10x365/7 = 1564.  88/1564 = 0.0563.  So Krauthammer’s Things That Matter consisted of 6% of his Things.

Liberal thinkers

1. John Stuart Mill
2. Alexis de Tocqueville
3. John Maynard Keynes
4. Schumpeter, Popper and Hayek
5. Berlin, Rawls and Nozick
6. Rousseau, Marx and Nietzsche

Today, August 27, 2018, I received my print version of The Economist describing Schumpeter, Popper and Hayek

Out of an abundance of caution

While I was still watching #FakeNews CNN, I would hear Wolf Blitzer (or other anchors) say "out of an abundance of caution".

This is an expensive attitude.  An attitude the "Duck Boat" victims wish their Captain had implemented in Branson, MO, recently.

The Federal Government used to require a Defense Contractor to prepare a System Engineering Plan (SEP).  Like Religion and Law, System Engineering is afflicted by Myths.

One myth is that systems engineering only works for large scale complex aerospace and defense systems. This myth is partially true in that Systems Engineering does work for large scale complex systems and goes a long way to enable success. The myth part is that it only works for these large systems. This myth is also emboldened because the Department of Defense requires their contractors to implement Systems Engineering methods and techniques and to spell out exactly how they plan to do that in a Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). The SEP is a required deliverable on every major defense acquisition program. This can easily lead some to believe that Systems Engineering is a rigorous and robust set of processes only applicable to large complex systems.

The fact is Systems Engineering can tailored to support development of smaller systems across a wide range of industry domains. Some examples include companies that produce medical devices, digital storage devices, laboratory diagnostic equipment and organizations that seek to increase reliability of the power grid.

Another myth is that Systems Engineering costs too much to implement. If you implement Systems Engineering for large complex systems, then it could cost a lot of money to implement, no question; however, it is possible to scale and tailor Systems Engineering methods and techniques for developing smaller systems so it does not cost too much to implement.

The "out of an abundance of caution" approach is expensive.  A good consultant can make it very expensive.  If you tailor the System Engineering approach, you MIGHT not get the reliability.

Syria

Has what's his name learned his lesson?

The Navy is not a military service

The US Navy is one of the seven services for which the Congress commissions an Officer corps.

http://dr2htay.blogspot.com/2016/06/seven-uniformed-services.html

The Constitution says, “The Congress shall have the Power:

…

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

.....

When I was aboard ship or at Naval Bases, they had signs which said for Military and Naval Officers Only.

Even Trump supporters recognize that this means that the Navy is not Military.

President Trump recently said that the removal of illegal immigrants was a "military operation" several news media people criticized his poor choice of words.

Most of those people think "boots on the ground" means soldiers in the field and the Navy is Military.

The Contradictions of Joseph Schumpeter

Is the title of Chapter X (10)  in The Worldly Philosophers by Robert L. Heilbroner a Touchstone Book  published by Simon & Schuster.  I have a copy of the revised seventh edition with a 1999 copyright.

For Schumpeter, capitalism was intrinsically dynamic and growth oriented.

Yet for all his faith in the inherent buoyancy of capitalism, Schumeter's long-term outlook was the exact opposite to the optimistic outlook of John Maynard Keynes.  Schumpeter, in an almost perversely teasing way, first maintained in "short run" capitalism would indeed trace a long climbing trajectory, adding that in these things, a century is a "short run".  But then came the disconcerting final judgment:  "Can capitalism survive? No.  I do not think that it can."

Any rational basis for American Exceptionalism must be based on the different economic system we have in the United States.

Schumpeter's dynamism creates problems for equilibrium models.