IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/60543.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Onblog Economics Muddle Busting

Author

Listed:
  • Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont

Abstract

The representative economist does not understand the two most important phenomena in the economic universe: profit and income. Because of this economists have nothing to offer in the way of a scientifically founded advice. Therefore, the contributions to economic blogs cannot claim to offer more than personal opinion. Of opinions, though, economics always had plenty. What is needed is knowledge – scientific knowledge, that is. With the outline of the correct economic paradigm at hand it is straightforward to refute obsolete approaches. For this purpose the economics blogs are ideal. A selection of recent comments is reproduced in the present paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2014. "Onblog Economics Muddle Busting," MPRA Paper 60543, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:60543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/60543/1/MPRA_paper_60543.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226727233 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Tomasson, Gunnar & Bezemer, Dirk J, 2010. "What is the Source of Profit and Interest? A Classical Conundrum Reconsidered," MPRA Paper 20320, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Mark Blaug, 1990. "Economic Theories, True or False?," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 49.
    4. Wayne, James J., 2013. "Fundamental Equation of Economics," MPRA Paper 50695, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Oskar Morgenstern, 1941. "Professor Hicks on Value and Capital," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 49(3), pages 361-361.
    6. Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas, 1970. "The Economics of Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(2), pages 1-9, May.
    7. Alfred S. Eichner, 1983. "Why Economics Is Not Yet a Science," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 507-520, June.
    8. Mark Obrinsky, 1981. "The Profit Prophets," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 491-502, July.
    9. Keen, Steve, 2010. "Solving the paradox of monetary profits," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 4, pages 1-32.
    10. Weintraub, E Roy, 1985. "Joan Robinson's Critique of Equilibrium: An Appraisal," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 146-149, May.
    11. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, December.
    12. Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2009. "The (unfortunate) complexity of the economy," Papers 0904.0805, arXiv.org.
    13. Egmont Kakarot-Handtke, 2013. "The Emergence of Profit and Interest in the Monetary Circuit," World Economic Review, World Economics Association, vol. 2013(2), pages 106-106, February.
    14. Robert Clower, 1999. "Post-Keynes Monetary and Financial Theory," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 399-414, March.
    15. Johannes J. Klant, 1994. "The Nature Of Economic Thought," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 262.
    16. Paul Davidson, 2002. "Financial Markets, Money and the Real World," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2467.
    17. Hands,D. Wade, 2001. "Reflection without Rules," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521797962, November.
    18. Mark Blaug, 2001. "No History of Ideas, Please, We're Economists," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(1), pages 145-164, Winter.
    19. McCauley, Joseph L., 2006. "Response to worrying trends in econophysics," MPRA Paper 2129, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, December.
    21. Anatol Murad, 1953. "Questions for Profit Theory," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2014. "Objective Principles of Economics," MPRA Paper 55031, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2012. "The rhetoric of failure: a hyper-dialog about method in economics and how to get things going," MPRA Paper 43276, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2014. "Economics for Economists," MPRA Paper 59659, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2014. "The Truly General Theory of Employment: How Keynes Could Have Succeeded," MPRA Paper 54367, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Drakopoulos, Stavros A., 2014. "Mainstream Aversion to Economic Methodology and the Scientific Ideal of Physics," MPRA Paper 57222, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "Redemption and Depression," MPRA Paper 50924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Stavros A. DRAKOPOULOS, 2016. "Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 28-57, November.
    8. Stavros A. Drakopoulos & Anastassios D. Karayiannis, 2005. "A Review of Kuhnian and Lakatosian «Explanations» in Economics," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 13(2), pages 51-73.
    9. Giandomenica Becchio, 2020. "The Two Blades of Occam's Razor in Economics: Logical and Heuristic," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, July.
    10. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "Understanding Profit and the Markets: The Canonical Model," MPRA Paper 48691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Eduardo Strachman & Jos Ricardo Fucidji, 2012. "The Current Financial And Economic Crisis Empirical And Methodological Issues," Journal of Advanced Studies in Finance, ASERS Publishing, vol. 3(1), pages 95-109.
    12. Irene van Staveren, 2012. "An Evolutionary Efficiency Alternative to the Notion of Pareto Efficiency," Economic Thought, World Economics Association, vol. 1(1), pages 1-6, July.
    13. Gérard Charreaux, 2008. "La recherche en finance d’entreprise:quel positionnement méthodologique ?," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(Special), pages 237-290, June.
    14. Scott Scheall, 2017. "What is extreme about Mises’s extreme apriorism?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 226-249, July.
    15. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2014. "Mr. Keynes, Prof. Krugman, IS-LM, and the End of Economics as We Know It," MPRA Paper 53608, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2012. "Why Post Keynesianism is not yet a science," MPRA Paper 43171, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. John B. Davis, 2013. "Mark Blaug on the historiography of economics," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 12, pages 159-176, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Egmont Kakarot-Handtke, 2013. "The Emergence of Profit and Interest in the Monetary Circuit," World Economic Review, World Economics Association, vol. 2013(2), pages 106-106, February.
    19. Geoffrey Poitras & Franck Jovanovic, 2010. "Pioneers of Financial Economics: Das Adam Smith Irrelevanzproblem?," History of Economics Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 43-64, January.
    20. D. Wade Hands, 2002. "Economic methodology is dead - long live economic methodology: thirteen theses on the new economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 49-63.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    new framework of concepts; structure-centric; axiom set; economics blogs; dead-ideas-recycling;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B49 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Other
    • B59 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:60543. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.