$1700 raised for Stan­dish-Min­sky so far

Flattr this!

Thanks to all those who have chipped in to help keep Rus­sell Stan­dish avail­able for cod­ing Min­sky. The prover­bial per­son with deep pock­ets hasn’t yet mate­ri­al­ized, but about 25 peo­ple with shal­lower ones but gen­er­ous souls have chipped in a total of just under $2000.

Keep Rus­sell Stan­dish on the Min­sky Project

Other Amount:

Your Email Address (and com­ment if you wish to add one) :

I’ve now altered the Pay­pal link on my site so that the pay­ments go directly to Russell’s Pay­pal account.

Please keep the dona­tions com­ing, and encour­age oth­ers to help out as well.

About Steve Keen

I am Professor of Economics and Head of Economics, History and Politics at Kingston University London, and a long time critic of conventional economic thought. As well as attacking mainstream thought in Debunking Economics, I am also developing an alternative dynamic approach to economic modelling. The key issue I am tackling here is the prospect for a debt-deflation on the back of the enormous private debts accumulated globally, and our very low rate of inflation.
Bookmark the permalink.
  • Pingback: $1700 raised for Standish-Minsky so far | The M...()

  • Tony Holmes

    Any alter­na­tive to Pay­Pal ?

  • I’ll see if Rus­sell can pro­vide his bank account details. That way direct account trans­fers would be pos­si­ble.

  • Rus­sell has said that he’s loathe to do so because it’s only worth­while (a) for Aus­tralian donors or (b) for large sums from over­seas, given bank trans­ac­tion fees.

    If you fit either cat­e­gory Tony, let me know via email: debunk­ing AT gmail DOT com.

  • Bhaskara II

    Here is some thing I wrote some where else that includes a work arrounds for the newly updated and still buggy fred graph. 

    Other data sources I use are:

    fred graph

    and z.1 “flow of funds” which many coun­tries pub­lish and there is a UN and OECD push to have every coun­try do it.

    Fred graph is really great becuase the data and graph­ing are in one place so it low­ers the num­ber of steps. If you can find a name of a data series it will prob­a­bly have the data and will graph it. Includ­ing most of the series from flow of funds. Flow of funds has codes and series names one of them will usu­ally work in fred graph.

    What is cool about fred:
    Again, data ang graphs are in one place, less labor, but then it is one source.
    I can share graphs with a link in com­ments or email, by click­ing “share” and using a link given. If I use that link the graph will be updated so my the­o­ries could be proven wrong in the future. But, If they screw it up in the future that link won´t work. Some one had that prob­lem for a while on his web­site when they decided to change the user inter­face. The notes sec­tion tells a lit­tle about the data def­i­n­i­tions. You can make a for­mula mix­ing time series wich means you don´t have to do the com­pu­ta­tion with an other pro­gram. Use ´´mod­ify exist­ing series´´ under ´´add series´´ and for­mula box under ¨Cre­ate your own data trans­for­ma­tion: [+]¨. It gives some info on the series def­i­n­i­tions using the notes tab.

    Fred graph user inter­face has been updated and is still a lit­tle buggy. Here is my guide for work­ing arround the buggy.
    1. Often you have to click a but­ton instead of hit­ting the return key.
    2. Scat­ter plot is bug­gi­est because fewer peo­ple use it. Often you have to set a line width in one of the series to get lines con­nect­ing the points. If it isn´t work­ing choose graph set­tings, line, and then graph set­tings, scat­ter, to reset it. Scater plot series have all be set to the same fre­quency, not a bug.
    3. Graph set­ting, log scale, when it works is nice but often does not so use ¨Cre­ate your own data trans­for­ma­tion: [+]¨ link and in the trans­for­ma­tion box pick ¨Nat­ural Log¨. for each series.
    4. They just made the stock mar­ket indexes just a few years rather than being his­tor­i­cal. No workar­round.
    5 . If you ajust all your time series to have the same fre­quency and down load the data the data is all mached in time wich makes it eas­ier to make scat­ter plots in other soft­ware. (hint)
    6. If you select one of your data series and an other one comes up then choose move up or move down but­ton and try again. If that does not work go into share get the link for the page and open a new web page with the link. If that does not work just open a new fred graph page and start over from scratch.
    7. It may loos some set­tings just redo them.
    8. Some times it might repeat a series, just trash the repeated series.
    9. Hit the apply but­ton.

    exam­ple: Notice it is saved on their site with the han­dle NnY

    Here is an exam­ple of the same data with a scat­ter plot with the lines show­ing time evo­lu­tions:
    Y-axis and X axi are listed at top. The y label show per­cent change in dol­lars.

    What does this show? The lines often times loop clock wise. Clock­wise loop­ing means y axis leads the x axis or x lags y. So year per­cent laged changes in per­sonal con­sump­tion per capita leads civil­ian employ­ment pop­u­la­tion ratio. The last dates show the finan­cial cri­sis. This is an engi­neer­ing analy­sis. But, think about it as going arround the path of the loop. Per­cent change of expen­da­ture rises then employ­ment pop­u­la­tion ratio later rises then the change in change of expen­da­ture goes down and employ­ment pop­u­la­tion ratio drops later, then the per­cent change in expen­da­ture rises. If one wants they can draw arrows from the points for direc­tion of travel. You might need to remove points using the dates to make sure over­lap­ing loops go the same direc­tion. You can count the dots for the dura­tion of a loop.

    What is cool about flow of funds: Dis­agreg­gated data of dif­fer­ent sec­tors, time series that main­streem text books don´t even talk about. Minuses, their account­ing is not exactly accrual account­ing used by accoun­tants, I think it might be nearer to mark to mar­ket but I don´t know. In other words it might be nearer to cur­rent price account­ing than his­tor­i­cal cost account­ing, but I don’t know.