I understood new money increases the flow but borrowing only changes channels of flow am I missing something here?

Dan, here is an article on Kuhn and being “in paradigm” Erickson and a few others get it, we need a shift in the way people view the world, discuss and debate ideas, a change in thier pespectives, better feedback systems. I don’t think Michael Johns is “in paradigm” he still holds onto the old viewpoints and perspectives and hasn’t really made that mental leap, and reading his blog and twitter, he seems like a really small minded petty person, not the kind of intellectual leadership that this world requires, more like an 18th century thinker, not a 21st century one.

From the article above:

“The question I hoped to answer,” he recalled later, “was how much mechanics Aristotle had known, how much he had left for people such as Galileo and Newton to discover. Given that formulation, I rapidly discovered that Aristotle had known almost no mechanics at all… that conclusion was standard and it might in principle have been right. But I found it bothersome because, as I was reading him, Aristotle appeared not only ignorant of mechanics, but a dreadfully bad physical scientist as well. About motion, in particular, his writings seemed to me full of egregious errors, both of logic and of observation.”

What Kuhn had run up against was the central weakness of the Whig interpretation of history. By the standards of present-day physics, Aristotle looks like an idiot. And yet we know he wasn’t. Kuhn’s blinding insight came from the sudden realisation that if one is to understand Aristotelian science, one must know about the intellectual tradition within which Aristotle worked. One must understand, for example, that for him the term “motion” meant change in general – not just the change in position of a physical body, which is how we think of it. Or, to put it in more general terms, to understand scientific development one must understand the intellectual frameworks within which scientists work. That insight is the engine that drives Kuhn’s great book.

As kuhn shows, he was astonished to find aristotle was an idiot.

It is important to understand the history of government, monetary systems, the evolution of society, organization of our civilization, etc, but I don’t think people like Michael Johns are very steeped in all that history and historical perspective, they are focused too much on the next political debate perhaps? Kuhn has it right, we need way more people “in paradigm” discussing and debating who are thinking about much bigger issues than the next POTUS, like it really matters which candidate wins. Pathetic.

http://michaeljohnsonfreedomandprosperity.blogspot.com/

Dan, here is another Mosler failure in the spirit of Ed Rombach. Michael Johns in one breath criticizes Obama for big government, in the next breath criticizes him for not doing more big government stuff during hurricane isaac. He wants to see the birth certificate of Obama and on his twitter is freaking out about fed printing and a 16T debt. What mosler has shown is that a political hack took certain ideas in 1996 and used them to attack clinton, he was never really “in paradigm” Mosler is grasping for straws lately it seems and people get turned off by folks trying to manipulate them and distort facts and belabor points to no end to achieve some political agenda.

I can’t tell you how sick it makes me to watch FOX last night constantly talk about how the jewish people are upset about jerusalem. I don’t give a flying phuck about jerusalem or israel, how did the entire convention coverage news cycle of the greatest economic power on the planet, that the world has ever seen in history, get captured by this little tiny piece of land thousands of miles away? I don’t get it. But michael johns in his twitter filled up the last 2 days on his account talking about israel and juraselam, not unemployed americans, I think he got his priorities fugged up.

http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/07/stiglitz_on_ine.html