ECONOMICS IS POLITICS

Lincoln Cathedral

This may sound really strange but every time I hear something along the lines of: "Lincoln Cathedral needs 10 million pounds to survive", my thought process is as follows:

They need that money to pay someone to repair the Cathedral. Agreed.

Someone like a construction company or something like that. Agreed?

Following my logic? Tell me any flaws in my logic please.

Right. So the construction company are probably quite rich.

So I do think - and please forgive me for this naïve simplicity - couldn't the building firm repair Lincoln Cathedral er... for free.. for nothing?

I know this is heresy in the religion of economics but there you go.

You may say "Well the construction company need the money to buy the bricks to repair Lincoln Cathedral."
Fair enough.

But can't they get at least some bricks for free? gratis? It's Lincoln Cathedral FFS - for goodness sake!

:)

Discuss.

And another thing was - why should it actually matter if the "economy" - whatever that is - doesn't "grow"?

Does it matter?

-----

I secretly suspect economics is a load of bollocks - and I am thinking of working this out a bit more......

"Economics: The Science of Lies".

I recently read an excellent book called: "Psychiatry: The Science of Lies".

I am waiting for someone to write: "Economics: The Science of Lies".

This book is potentially a very long one. :)

There is no such as an "economy".

There is no such thing as an economy.

If Thatcher can say "There is no such thing as a society" then I can say "There is no such thing as an economy", which may sound equally ridiculous. I think it is less ridiculous.

There is no such thing as an economy. There cannot be an economy where an economy is defined as "the total value of the goods and services in a society", since this is defined by humans and cannot have an objective definition in this case.

On the BBC or in a newspaper "economy" usually means "the total value of the goods and services in a political state". I assume that's what they mean anyway. Like when they say "the economy grew by 2% this year". Look up "economy" elsewhere and you'll find other definitions. Interesting.

The "total value of the goods and services in a society" is only ever an opinion. In my opinion, I wouldn't give you a carrot for the goods and services contained in..er..wherever... let's say Watford Gap Service Station on the M1. Someone else might say they were worth a fiver. Someone else a tenner. :) Someone else might say two carrots... etc.

Also this assumes we can agree on what constitutes a "good" or a "service" ... Well you may say anything that has a cash value... Well, anything can have a cash value if you pay cash for it....

I work in a second hand bookshop and I recently found a heap of books on economics, including a few dictionaries of economics. I looked up "economy" in the glossary/dictionary of each book and almost every one had a different definition.
The Victorians maybe had it right when they tended to call it "Political Economy" like in "The Importance of Being Earnest".

There cannot really be economic laws. Since at any time humans could act in any way.

Prices and demand are essentially created by humans and can be changed at any time by humans. Humans could refuse to buy or sell anything at all at any time. Hence strictly speaking there can be no economic laws.... Economics is Politics.

-------

The term "society" obviously refers - apart from anything else - to a concept, as does the term "mind"....
The concept of a society is probably a valid concept.

-------

The use of the term "economy" to refer to a "system" is still obviously very vague.

-------------------------
Another point about this is that it is probably impossible to disbelieve in (the existence of ) "society" and yet at the same time to believe in (the existence of) an "economy"; this impossible position would seem to be the position of some on the political right.
If you disbelieve in "society", then surely a fortiori you must disbelieve in an "economy".
?
.....

Economics need radical re-assessment.
Try here for some of it:

www.neweconomics.org

"PIGS" (Economics) Disambiguation!

If "PIGS" is not a racist acronym - and it clearly is! - why wasn't "GIPS" chosen?

Same letters - same racism!.....

One could be forgiven for thinking that -
"Economics is politics and politics is racism."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PIGS_(economics)

...........

Alexander Rosenberg.

There is at least ONE other Filosofa to be sceptical about "Economics"....

ID EST:) -

Alexander Rosenberg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Rosenberg

"Economics Always Devolves Into Sociology."

"Economy"

If you use the word "ECONOMY" as a CONCRETE noun - STOP! and try and think of EXACTLY what you denote by the term!

For most of its existence the word "ECONOMY" was an ABSTRACT noun. Like "bravery", "perseverance" or "panache"....

If you use expressions like "a fairer economy", "at the centre of the economy", "the economy was squeezed", "the economy was boosted"......STOP! and THINK of EXACTLY what you denote by the term "ECONOMY" in those expressions!...

If you think about it you may often see it means very little......

Doing this little exercise may hopefully help you in your thinking about the whole question.....

--------------------

Further homework :) could include thinking of what term one would employ to replace the term "economy" in one's own discourse....

Also very revealing! Suggestions I came up with included "distributive/distribution system" or "profit(-making) system........