As most Australian readers would know, I recently lost half of a bet over Australian house prices when the Government’s “First Home Owners Boost”–which I prefer to call the First Home Vendors Boost–reignited Australia’s house price bubble.
As a result, I’m walking from Australia’s Parliament House to Australia’s highest mountain, Mt Kosciousko–a distance of 224km (140 miles). The walk will start at 2pm on Thursday April 15 from the entrance to Parliament House and–my legs willing–finish 8 days later on the summit of Mt Kosciousko (which is 2228 metres–or about 7000 feet–above sea level).
I have started a new blog www.keenwalk.com.au to support the walk, which I will use to draw attention to the absurdity of basing economic policy on making housing less affordable.
I would be delighted to have the company of any blog members or readers who can spare an afternoon for a 15km or so walk with me. Full details are given on the other blog, but in a nutshell I will be running about 15km every morning, and walking about the same distance every afternoon starting at about 2pm (anyone who can make it to Canberra one evening should have no difficulty driving to the start of any given day’s walk, since the entire drive from Canberra to Mt Kosciousko can be done in less than 3 hours).
The site won’t be as active as Debtwatch–I can barely handle the workload from one blog, let alone two! (Incidentally, Debtwatch is now getting about 60,000 unique readers each month). It has a static front page explaining why I’m doing the walk, and other pages for sponsorship, talking about the charity I’ll be supporting, and so on. During the walk itself I’ll blog frequently about the day’s activities, how I’m bearing up physically, who came along for the day, etc.
I reproduce the press release launching the new site below. Please go to the site to read the “Why I’m Walking” front page, which is an exposition on the housing bubble in Australia. I’ll copy that post to here in a few days time, but for now I’d like to get the new site inaugurated with a large number of visitors.
And if you can afford a day or so to come along and join me for the walk, please do sign up!
Launch of www.keenwalk.com.au
Steve Keen lost half of a famous bet with Macquarie Bank’s Rory Robertson when Australian house prices set a new record in September of last year. As a result, Steve is walking from Parliament House in Canberra to Mt Kosciousko—a distance of 224km. The walk will start on April 15th at 2pm. Steve plans to cover about 30km a day and finish in the afternoon of April 23rd.
Steve is hardly cowed by having lost half of the bet. “The main bet, over whether house prices here would fall by about 40% over 10-15 years as they did in Japan, is still alive and well”, he noted. “Rory may yet have to follow in my footsteps.”
He also commented that even critics of his outspoken views on the economy agree that the Rudd Government’s “First Home Owners Boost” was the main reason house prices were still rising a year after Robertson proposed the bet. “Even Terry McCrann, who’s hardly a fan of mine, agreed that my nickname for it—the First Home Vendors Boost—is apt (“Behaving stupidly on first home buyer grant”, Herald-Sun November 3rd 2009). All the Boost did was drive up prices, as first home buyers used the extra A$7,000 to borrow another $30-50,000 that they handed over to the sellers.”
“Now, as Fujitsu Consulting has shown, almost half of those new owners are financially stressed. The money they borrowed stimulated the economy, but what will happen to them and the economy when they can’t afford to keep up the payments? They are potentially the sacrificial lambs of Australia’s so far successful evasion of the GFC.”
“I’m happy to walk from Parliament House to Mt Kosciousko if I can draw attention to the absurdity of basing economic policy on making housing more unaffordable.”
Today Professor Keen launched the website www.keenwalk.com.au, which will support the walk and raise funds for the charity Swags for Homeless.
“Swags for Homeless is a brilliant Australian innovation, providing real help now to the 16,000 people sleeping rough in this Lucky Country. Every $60 raised will provide one homeless person with a portable weatherproof swag, to make those evenings in the open less uncomfortable.”
Professor Keen will do the walk solo if necessary, but he’s more than happy to be joined by others. “If you agree that Australia’s housing prices and policies are crazy, and you can manage a 15km walk, then sign up at www.keenwalk.com.au and join me for an afternoon stroll on the road to Mt Kosciousko.”






February 15th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Wish I could join you, Steve. It would be an privilege. We will be sure to update our listeners on your progress (as well as that of the faltering American housing market, which is poised for its own next leg down — could be very evident by April).
Admirable and enlightened the way you are managing this. Very commendable.
February 15th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
Excellent ironic take on economic summits. How did the other one go (the central bankers in Sydney)?
February 15th, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Hi Steve
Have been reading your site as an unregistered user for around 12 months – very informative and educational – I appreciate all your work and efforts. Let me know if you need any assistance for snow related conditions as I am a climber who has done a little guiding – I helped out with the Smith Family Triple Climb last year in May and Mt Kosciousko ended up being a complete snowshoeing exercise. I also have a mate who is a qualified climbing guide and runs a climbing/guiding business in the Snowys and it could be a good training run for us as we are off to Kazakhstan in August to attempt Khan Tengri at around 7000m.
February 15th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
Thanks noneconomist,
I would love the assistance and the company. I’ll email you off list when I get back from tonight’s gym workout.
Here’s hoping that April 23 is too early to have to worry about snowshoes!
February 15th, 2010 at 10:30 pm
This is off topic, but I want to recommend Hugh Hendry (to Steve and readers) – he doesn’t seem to have got a mention on this site so far, despite being strongly in the debtdeflation camp.
Try the following videos on YouTube:
* Hugh Hendry, Nassim Taleb and Marc Faber discuss risk for 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ2otZqmNKE
* Hendry interviewed on CNBC (in October 2009) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzCp5u35QZE
February 15th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
I will be relocating to the UK shortly, and won’t be here in April, otherwise I’d have been keen to join in the walk.
February 15th, 2010 at 11:55 pm
Can people overseas donate as well? If yes, where do we do it?
February 16th, 2010 at 12:43 am
Hello Steve,
I would be willing to join you for part of ‘the walk’. I would have plenty to chat about, maybe wave particle duality and how it’s reflects in economic cycles. Does the act of observing the economy actually influence the economy?
I have just moved house (over 3 weeks) and now unpacking. The size of the house is 250% greater but the rent is only 40% more expensive. The old landlord is increasing the rent of the old house from $250 to $300. This is typical for this end of the market which I refer to as the lower rental market squeeze caused by rental affordability. If the rental market was in step, my old house would be rented at $170 per week. This would be a 43% decrease in rent.
Steve, what range of the market do you think will experience the most in housing deflation. If 40% is the average, what are the extremes? Could you see a range from 20% to 60% in housing deflation?
February 16th, 2010 at 7:49 am
I love it! This is amazing.
Wish I could book a ticket to Australia right now – I imagine in 2000 years some book will be published about a holy march to some mountain led by a great prophet called Steve Keen who forecast the apocalypse and led his disciples to safety. If you can’t manage the water into wine trick just yet, I’ll be happy to donate something for the trip. Is there a paypal link somewhere?
This is wonderful, truly.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:07 am
Yes there is Frank–on the http://www.keenwalk.com.au site below the logo for Swags for Homeless and RP Data.
I’ll think about the Noah imagery; always saw myself more in the Martin Luther vein as it happens (reforming a corrupt church, that sort of thing!).
February 16th, 2010 at 8:07 am
Steve,
I will obviously try to join – I need to work out when I am able to do it.
I don’t believe in the apocalypse but we will have to pay the price as a society and as individuals. We need to understand that the current social model with the perfect income redistribution vehicle called the mortgage debt has been created with at least the consent of the majority.
One day (quite soon in my opinion) the majority will have to pay the price.
February 16th, 2010 at 8:08 am
Hi Alan,
The top end is likely to fall the most once the Ponzi caper is finally over, but that can take a long time. I don’t know enough to comment about the distribution below there, but the range you nominate is certainly feasible.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:06 am
Hi Steve,
I have to say that you’re walking/running schedule seems pretty tough, but I guess that’s the way it should be when one makes a bet.
I am not a regular around here, but since I’m moving to Canberra on the 10th of April I would be delighted to join you for a walk one of the days.
February 16th, 2010 at 9:49 am
Good walking Steve. Sounds like you will set a challenging benchmark for RR to try and match.
Hope that you have put your views into the budgeting process in Victoria. Was disheartened to see that the REIV had suggested that the state govt should step further into the breach by lifting the First Home Owners Bonus (or was it Grant? – it’s hard to keep up) or by scrapping stamp duty for first home buyers. The statesmen in control of the public purse need reminding of what their legacy is likely to be if they keep going down this alley.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:17 am
Hi Steve,
“….in a nutshell I will be running about 15km every morning, and walking about the same distance every afternoon starting at about 2pm…”
Gee thanks for that. Wives read this blog too you know.
All the best for the walk. We are kicking in for the Swag raising.
Can your techs put up a counter? Maybe a fund raising target as well? FWIW perhaps you could relate the target back to the height of your ascent up Mt Kosciousko. You could start with a modest ratio then, if you surpass that, you can tighten it up.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:47 am
Hi Steve,
I’ll be there on the 15th!
Although “slightly” overweight, I can manage a few hours walk. Besides, this gives me a reason to lose some of the blubber, and I’ve never been to Canberra.
As Big Kev (the TV bloke who used to sell all sorts of stuff his company made) used to say: “I’m exsoited!”
You’ve gotta train, because as Linus said, it’s pretty tough.
Are you taking a doctor with you?
February 16th, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Looking forward to your company ak! Hopefully you can join me on one of the morning runs too?
February 16th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Excellent linus. Can you do me a favour and try out the form on the “Join Me” page? I need to check how it’s working.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
I don’t have the time to organise a counter angophera, but it should be possible to some degree since the PayPal link will tally the sums. If any IT pros out there (or WordPress experts) can assist, I’m all ears.
February 16th, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Excellent Marco2. It would be great to get a good press of people at the start of the walk, since we’ll be at Parliament House–a very apt place from which to start this trek.
February 16th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
Steve,definitely go the “Noah” symbolism.
It will have a much wider resonance than the Martin Luther.
great potential cartoon imagery.
“leading the masses out of the economic wilderness”
(ignorance/insanity)
February 16th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
Mr Opportunity – this is fantastic, I’ll defintely sponsor for a great cause make that 2 great causes and maybe walk if I can get to Canberra. In my opinion one factor that needs highlighting (and maybe unique to Australia) is the fact that housing investors actually get tax breaks!!! Take the investors out of the market and that might make housing more affordable – I know its been done before but in very different conditions.
February 16th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
Steve,
I will be very happy to take part in the morning runs. Unfortunately I cannot plan my holidays 2 months ahead but I want to join you for at least 2-3 days.
I actually own a small house so according to some opinions expressed on this forum and elsewhere on the Internet I should be unhappy if the prices fall. But this is irrelevant in the context of what I believe is right and what is wrong for our society. In my opinion the housing debt cancer is one of the most serious social problems. I would like to show my support even if all I can do is just to walk and run.
February 17th, 2010 at 12:12 am
Great site Mr. Keen,
I’ve been an avid reader of your site since 2008 (I don’t log on everyday but I try and read your thoughts at least once a week) and only now just joined. I have one question, I’m sure you alluded to in your stance against the FIRE economy.But how do we transition ourselves away from this FIRE economy given that most manufacturing is now done in cheaper countries such as China and the fact that the government looks like it wants to put into play a free trade agreement with them. One can only learn from the US experience (NAFTA) in this regard. We’re probably going to lose what little manufacturing we have left? Also how would you propose making housing more affordable and not creating (a form) moral hazard (i.e. if people had a house, coupled with the dole, what incentives would people have to work (i.e. pay off their mortgage?). Would it still not be a debt based system as part of the fractional (or fictional as Mish Shedlock puts it) reserve system of loans? I personally believe in freedom of choice, and I personally would like the idea of affordable housing, and I don’t doubt the Aussie work ethic but this may (not surely) lead to some very undesireable results. Just my thoughts. If I’ve missed a post of yours that covers this, let me know, I don’t want to waste your precious time.
PS Enjoy your walk, I’ve been trekking in the Himalayas before but only for a 90 Km trek in 4 days. That’s a helluva lot more so I wish you all the best. It can be quite exhausting!
February 17th, 2010 at 12:58 am
For those of you in Australia the issue of house prices is ‘the topic of the day’ (a talk-back session) on ‘Nightlife with Tony Delroy on ABC National radio, http://www.abc.net.au/nightlife/ after ‘The Quiz’.
In his promo he talked of you Steve and your bet with Rory Robertson and the associated website.
So could be interesting to hear what people are saying. The segment could have already started if you’re in Eastern Australia.
February 17th, 2010 at 6:23 am
Steve:
I submitted my name using the “Join me” form, but I do not yet know what day I will be able to join you.
On another topic: I’ve been trying to get a better idea of monetary theory, including endogenous money theories. Being trained in mostly neoclassical macroeconomics I do not have that much knowledge of anything but monetarism, although I have read some articles by you and for example Basil Moore. I want to learn more about this topic though, and was wondering if you can point me in the direction of some of the most important articles within this field.
February 17th, 2010 at 3:56 pm
This might be just nitpicking but…
If I recall correctly the bet was to WALK. From what I can see you intend to RUN half of the time, therefore you will likely cover more distance running rather than walking. Are you sure you will be coming true on the bet?
February 17th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Re #21 vk: I think that really is nit-picking! I’d be obviously cheating if I drove or even cycled. But running is clearly harder than merely walking.
February 17th, 2010 at 5:15 pm
Hi Linus; re endogenous money articles, the most useful would be Graziani’s “Monetary theory of production” articles (though for the concept and philosophy, not the mathematics!), and Minsky’s “Can It Happen Again” and “The financial instability hypothesis restated” papers.
February 18th, 2010 at 10:21 am
Hi Steve,
By losing the bet you really won. You get to do something that is very admirable.
I hope you get lots of publicity and use it to raise public awareness of how the new generations of hard working Australians are getting screwed by government poilicies in the Real Estate market.
(But please no more predictions!)
All the best.
February 18th, 2010 at 11:48 am
Re # 30 on the walk: Yes TININT, that’s the way I feel as well. And on bets, I think I can say I’ve done my bit! I hope you can join me for a day on the walk too!
February 18th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
Steve,
As you know I believe your prediction of a fall in Oz house prices will come true eventually. MISH has done a great hit piece on unsustainable Oz house prices, and even The Economist believes Oz house prices are the most overpriced in the world. A whole array of coercive govt policies – excessive immigration, over-crowded cities, housing subsidies, interest rate policy – are designed to keep this Ponzi scheme alive with unaffordable housing and an exacerbation of the homeless problem. Why? Because bank solvency and govt tax revenues rely on ever-increasing land and house prices.
When the last sucker finds out he’s in way over his head – despite the subsidies and the giveaways and the incentives – then the whole thing collapses. A spike in the “price” (interest rate) of international wholesale debt and the introduction of new liquidity rules by APRA in 2011 should be the triggers for a fall, regardless of rental demand and housing shortages. After all, if interest rates double, prices must fall regardless of rental demand.
I’d love to walk with you for at least a few hours, and ask you why you don’t ever mention the Austrians in your list of those economists who predicted the bust. They were the most prominent.
You keep talking about Fisher, and post-Keynesians. You and I both know the Austrians nailed the GFC. For example, see here:
http://www.goldensextant.com/SavingtheSystem.html
I can’t believe this is an oversight on your part. It really disappoints me that you don’t give credit where credit is due. A true objective (non-partisan) analysis of those who predicted the GFC would certainly include Ron Paul and Peter Schiff in the mix as well as Geanakopolos. I hope you do get in touch with Geanakopolos one day – I think you are both modelling the same phenomena from different angles. A joint paper would be a Nobel-prize winner.
February 18th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
And just on the consequences on real estate if a gold standard was re-introduced see page 266 of the Report to the Gold Commission in the US:
http://www.goldensextant.com/Resources%20PDF/Gold%20Commission%20Report%20Annex%20A.pdf
Way back in the early 1980s, it was recognised that with a fiat money system, the only refuge to protect savings from inflation and taxation was excessive speculation in real estate and housing. Nothing has changed. If a sound money system was re-introduced, prices would fall and demand would increase, spurring production of affordable housing.
February 18th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
Hi Karmaisking,
I do acknowledge Peter–both here and on keenwalk–but I disagree with Austrian theory for reasons that, one of these days, I am going to have to provide chapter and verse on, but at present I don’t have the time.
As for prominence, there’s no doubt they dominated the discussion in financial circles, since the dominant form of contrarian thinking there is clearly Austrian. But in academic circles it was the Post Keynesians who were most vocal. That should at least point out that there are important commonalities across this divide.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
Agreed Steve, there are massive commonalities. It’s actually difficult to see the difference between ABCT and the post-Keynesian analysis of the credit cycle.
I note that Austrians are not prominent in academic circles because they’ve been purged from academia. Not one Austrian teaches in any university in Australia or the UK. That’s not (in my view) accidental.
I’d be fascinated in reading your critique of the Austrian view of money. It’s very simple: monopoly is bad and competition is good and “market money” historically has been gold and silver for the simple reason that they are the most liquid commodities. Paper fiat has never arisen spontaneously from “the market” because it’s always imposed by monopoly govts wanting to inflate and cartelised banks wanting to indebt.
I’m sure you are aware of the history of the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve. It’s an ugly story of Mafioso-style corruption at the top. Why would cartel banks want a central bank? Like any collusive group, they want to preserve monopoly power.
Trying to find a “solution” to the banking problem inside a monopoly currency and inside central banking is futile. Breaking up of monopolies is (supposedly) the duty of the ACCC but they never look at the collusion between the banks and the RBA in fixing the price of debt money.
That’s the biggest market distortion on the planet today. And the most destructive. This has nothing whatever to do with “the free market”:
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17282.html
February 18th, 2010 at 4:34 pm
There is a good precis of why Austrian theory is/was excluded in academia on the entry at the wikipedia :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School#Influence
“Austrian economics was ill-thought of by most economists after World War II because it rejected mathematical and statistical methods.”
The virtues of maths and models have been discussed and Steve’s opinion of neo-classical models is well-known.
The Austrian axioms and generally non-empirical approach: presents real problems,not only in argument but also verifiability. I don’t really have time to go into it but having spent a year of my student life on deductive and inductive logic and black swans etc, the Austrian approach is not convincing enough.
By contract Steve’s ambition of a dynamic model is – to this non economist – is what is needed, now more than ever.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
I desperately want to avoid a slanging match over AS and ABCT in particular, but I just remind the reader that mainstream economics generally is woeful in verification of its theories and economists around the world ply their trade by building ever-more ridiculous mathematical models and most of them can never be tested in the real world (EMH being a good example).
Verification is simple: Did someone predict something or not? Austrians did predict the GFC but they are not getting credit for it.
Often those ignorant of AS see the quotes from Mises about praxeology and assume it’s completely non-empirical. Really all he was saying is that historical data always is messy so there’s no point trying to “prove” something in economics. It’s a social science. It’s like trying to “prove” that WWII wouldn’t have happened had Hitler been killed in 1928. It’s all speculation because the casuality in economics is multi-faceted. So AS theorists focus on history and patterns rather than modelling. As an example:
http://mises.org/rothbard/agd.pdf
Please don’t get bogged down in the idea that AS is a “religion”. All AS advocates are really saying is that it’s a social science not amendable to “scientific” testing. Like history.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
As one walks I can only hope that one reflects on the reason ones prediction was confounded.
Marx would never have made such a prediction as he recognised that capitalists use countervailing tendencies and this, in modern times, is what population increase, per capita debt increase and stimulus is all about.
Of course it is not sustainable, but capitalists will plunder anyone and everyone to prop-up the system, precisely so prophets of doom are forestalled.
Unfortunately such rash predictions can bring descredit on other individuals working slowly on these problems.
February 18th, 2010 at 5:49 pm
No dispute that mainstream economics is lamentable in many areas but to clarify that verification is not prediction and, in addition, verification is very hard. That’s where the other big Austrian school comes in – hence inductive logic and black swans etc, which are news to economists (apparently) but not to philosophers. This is an area where AS does have real questions over verification.
February 18th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
Hi Karmaisking,
This point–competition as the salve to market failure–is actually an example of why I am critical of Austrian and neoclassical theory, and to some extent put them in the same bracket (though I acknowledge the attitude towards equilibrium and several other issues differs). On this front both appeal to a supply and demand analysis of price setting, with the belief that competition will lead to a “supply equals demand” equilibrium because of profit maximising behaviour, while monopolies will restrict supply so that demand exceeds supply under monopolies.
It’s possible to tie the neoclassicals down on the logic behind this because, with their attempt to be mathematical, there is a mathematical argument that can be analysed. As I show in several papers ([1] [2] amongst others), the maths is wrong: given the assumptions of the theory, competition will lead to the same outcome as monopoly.
I think also that many of the recent problems have been caused by promoting competition in finance. It lead to a “race to the bottom” as new entrants fought for market share. The ugliness of the Fed is indeed there but I argue that it is overlaid on the ugliness of competitive finance in the first instance. I’d rather do something that I expect many Austrians would in fact agree with, which is to do nothing about the market structure–let it evolve–but change the legal framework of capital assets.
Overall I find Austrian theory on money somewhat shallow, but certainly better than neoclassical thinking on this front which is simply fantastical. But to explain why is something that will take half a book to do properly, and for ages I won’t have the time I am afraid.
February 18th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Steve, your modelling is superb but your characertisation of AS is a little worrying. I think you may not like it because you don’t “get it”. As my link to Frank Shostak shows, no Austrian thinks “competition in finance” (with a monopoly currency and a central bank) is good. We all think the repeal of Glass Steagall was a disaster in the making. Ron Paul voted against it. Murray Rothbard wrote:
“Many free-market advocates wonder: why is it that I am a champion of free markets, privatization, and deregulation everywhere else, but not in the banking system? The answer should now be clear: Banking is not a legitimate industry, providing legitimate service, so long as it continues to be a system of fractional-reserve banking: that is, the fraudulent making of contracts that it is impossible to honor.”
MR was for 100% reserves, which is about as “anti-deregulation” in finance as you can get!
AS does NOT believe the old “supply equals demand” equilibrium paradigm – they are the first (perhaps only) School to reject equilibrium analysis completely! We simply state obvious truths – if you have no competition (in currencies, not banking!) the product produced is likely to be of less quality than if there were multiple competitors competing for customers in a voluntary market.
Examples: iPhone vs Defence services (ASIO etc etc). We all know that the Defence forces are notoriously inefficient (Collins class submarines, bullying, intimidation of ministers, over-staffing, etc etc) because they don’t “compete” for customers – our taxes are “stolen” from us by the same fools who stuffed up the Collins class submarines! There’s no escaping these idiots.
There is an escape from an iPhone. Nokia. Samsung. Blackberry. etc etc. Guess what? All the products are better because you CAN escape.
Similarly, we all scream here about the madness of insanely high house prices, but if we were legally able to trade and pay taxes in gold or silver or any other currency, I guarantee this foolishness would quickly come to an end because the workers would all demand payment in a non-inflationary currency. The root cause of the problem is monopoly control of fiat currency by the central bank. Eliminate the central bank and allow free banking (worldwide) and none of this foolishness would happen. It’s because govts constantly save their banking friends that we are in this mess.
That we can all agree on!
February 18th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Please everyone (including Steve!) who is reading this blog, please please please click on and read this link to Frank Shostak:
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article17282.html
I’ve already provided the link but from Steve’s comments I know he hasn’t read it. This should blow away any misconception that Steve’s “anti-market” position is opposed to the Austrian “pro-market” position. They are actually almost identical.
It’s just that post-Keynesians like Steve still don’t “get” that the whole problem is caused by little bits of paper backed by nothing and enforced by a govt tax collector’s gun and controlled by the central bank being the root cause of the problem.
If gold or silver was coined and circulated, there would no bank daring to go below 15% reserves. No bank would dare do it. All we all agree excessive leverage is the root cause of the problem. The solution is there, but no one other than the Austrians can completely kill off the govt’s ability to “legitimatise” the counterfeiting in FRB by ex post facto printing of e-money after a systemic crisis. That is why govts and bankers fear gold and the Austrians. And why no Austrian teaches economics in the UK or Oz.
February 18th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
This may yield some insight on the methodology of economic theory:
“If a contradiction appears between a theory and experience, we must always assume that a condition pre-supposed by the theory was not present, or else there is some error in our observation. The disagreement between the theory and the facts of experience frequently forces us to think through the problems of the theory again. But so long as a rethinking of the theory uncovers no errors in our thinking, we are not entitled to doubt its truth.” (pp. 39-40)
Ludwig von Mises, quoted in Katouzian, Homa. 1980. Ideology and Method in Economics, MacMillian Press Ltd., London.
In other words, if reality is in conflict with your ideas, do not adjust your views because reality must be at fault! The scientific method would be to revise the theory in light of the facts. It is not scientific to reject the facts in light of the theory! Without experience, any theory is just a flight of fantasy. For the higher a deductive edifice is built, the more likely it is that errors will creep in and these can only be corrected by checking the analysis against reality. Starting assumptions and trains of logic may contain inaccuracies so small as to be undetectable, yet will yield entirely false conclusions. Similarly, trains of logic may miss things which are only brought to light by actual experiences or be correct, but incomplete or concentrate on or stress inappropriate factors. To ignore actual experience is to loose that input when evaluating a theory.
http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secC1.html
As Steve notes, “If you believe you can use unreality to model reality, then eventually your grip on reality itself can become tenuous.” (p. 177, Debunking Economics).
As Mark Blaug argues:
“Economists are loath to examine their assumptions by the use of survey techniques, by simply asking agents what they believe or what they do, because Friedman’s methodology gave economists the false impression that nothing can ever be learned by such means. Perhaps the real trouble is our age-old belief, going back to Ricardo, that economics is essentially a deductive science, in which we infer economic behavior on the basis of some assumptions about motivations and some stylized facts about prevailing institutions, suppressing even the temptation to ask whether these are descriptively realistic assumptions and accurately chosen facts. It is high time that economists re-examined their long-standing antipathy to induction, fact-grubbing, and fact gathering before, and not after, we sit down to theorize.” (p. 30)
Blaug, Mark. 1998. “Disturbing Currents in Modern Economics,” Challenge, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 11-34.
February 18th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
“Eliminate the central bank and allow free banking (worldwide) and none of this foolishness would happen.”
Ah, “worldwide”. Please explain it to the Chinese Politburo. But I think that they enjoy free banking anyway.
February 18th, 2010 at 8:54 pm
ak, agreed the solution is not politically feasible – but no other solution would “work”. All solutions that leave the central bank in charge are just BS – because the banks can still rely on “mommy” to bail them out in a liquidity crisis. So I agree we are doomed – the solution that would work is not politically feasible and no other solution (increased regulation blah blah blah) would work.
But there’s no point whining about leverage when the institutional framework allows it and encourages it. The Money Mafioso are in charge and so we are all victims of the madness until the whole stupid debt Ponzi scheme collapses (Greece, Ireland, the US etc etc).
And the quotes from Mises are slightly misleading. He’s saying data is messy, logic is not so let’s focus on theory and not modelling. Other economists focus on modelling (not verfication) and they have completely failed in accurate prediction. Even Steve got house prices wrong in 2009. If economics is a science, it’s still pathetic at prediction – the ultimate “test” of any predictive science.
If the weather guys would as bad, we’d all be going out with umbrellas on a sunny day. That’s how bad economists have been in predicting financial crisis. Perhaps Mises wasn’t so stupid after all in eschewing modelling and empiricism. Perhaps even Steve could learn a thing or two from Mises’ attitude.
February 18th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
Hi Karmaisking,
I’ll check the Shostak piece; I agree that Austrians are anti-equilibrium, but my problem is that they don’t take that far enough. Again it would take more than a comment to explain why, but I’ll illustrate with just one element of your comment: “because the workers would all demand payment in a non-inflationary currency”. This implies a level of knowledge of the systemic consequences of some aspect of a market economy that, if we take Hayek’s sensible comments about knowledge seriously, can’t be presumed to exist. I think at some stage in a cycle workers would quite happily accept payment in a currency that at a later stage turned out to be inflationary because of systemic feedbacks that literally aren’t observable at the level of individual knowledge.
I think the foolishness would not come to an end, but would be cyclical–as indeed it was in the 19th century when there was a serious financial crisis every 7-15 years, and with no Central Bank in sight.
I fully agree that Central Banks have amplified this and made it twice as bad as it would have been without them. It’s also why my remedies for the situation don’t involve regulation or government policy but simply redefining capital assets in a way that removes the temptation to succumb to debt during a speculative bubble.
And I think some banks would work with 8% reserves at a bubble stage in the cycle and clamp back to 20% in the aftermath. But we wouldn’t see them going to 4%, which is what the Fed’s rescues ultimately encouraged.
February 18th, 2010 at 9:26 pm
Ahem Karmaisking: I hope that at least here, I am entitled to the defence that (a) I wasn’t predicting house prices over the short term but over a decade; and (b) there was the minor issue of the government extending the First Home Vendors Boost by six months in May of 2009? -:) I knew I was sunk as of then with Rory’s bet.
Cheers, Steve
February 18th, 2010 at 11:08 pm
Philip @ 43… nice quotes…It’s what I was alluding to in the comments about inductive logic.
February 19th, 2010 at 11:18 am
I understand your solution and it would be very likely to reduce the amplitude of the cycles – which are getting more and more violent with each crazy cycle and the debt spirals out of control.
However your solution relies on the integrity and competence of the very same govt and regulatory officials who got us into this corrupt insane debt-fuelled mess. Short of a revolution where you are put in charge of the RBA (highly unlikely in my view) I don’t see your solutions being implemented either.
There are actually a range of solutions that would be much better than the current system:
1. Free banking, no central bank, with gold being an option for legal tender.
2. Nationalisation of the banking system and issuance of debt free currency (Michael Rowbotham) or the setting up of national banks (Ellen Hodgson Brown, modelled on the Dakota Bank).
3. 100% reserve banking (Murray Rothbard).
The reason none of these options is ever discussed is that the political elite won’t allow monetary reform to be discussed. We are doomed so long as the same idiots who brought us the mess are in charge.
So in my humble view your solution is even less viable than mine because although my solution would still engender business cycles, at least (1 it’s been tried before and (sort of) worked (2) it doesn’t rely on corrupt govt officials for it to work (it just requires them to die or go away).
Your solution relies on the integrity of govt. Which is why it will never be implemented.
February 19th, 2010 at 2:03 pm
And just on a comparison between the Austrian and 100% reserve solution (EH Brown) see this piece from the Mises Institute:
http://mises.org/daily/4102
I hope this gives readers a good overall understanding of the monetary reform options that are available, and dispels misunderstandings. We need to work together if real reform is to be achieved.