Friday, January 30, 2015


Yesterday, in , CONTEMPORARY ECONOMICS. ITS TRUE ORIGINS AND WHY IT IS FAKE, I gave you the first part of an essay, On the Science of Economics and Its Relation to Free Exchange and Socialism, written by the brilliant Henry Dunning MacLeod, an eminent banking lawyer of his day and a man who knew more about trade and reality than all those who have since lived and died who have called themselves "economists".

Today, I give you the second part of the essay, itself in two parts. In the first part, MacLeod is gives a lesson on free trade. This lesson holds true whether such trade is insular or foreign. In the second part, MacLeod is gives a lesson on the foolishness of socialism.

When reading this lesson you could apply his lesson upon Obamacare, an example of regulated insular trade, or any so-called contemporary "free trade agreements," which, long ago, all thinking men recognized as treaties of reciprocity designed to promote particular interests.

Here MacLeod begins to lay down his argument that while free trade is inherently right, any force that interferes in free trade between two is little more than robbery by another name.

And here MacLeod lays down what libertarians would recognize as the non-aggression principle long before 20th century libertarians existed.

And then MacLeod reveals how the interference by legislators in the trade of property to the benefit of favored parties amounts to robbery by other means.

To help the reader understand, MacLeod provides an example.

From here, MacLeod dives into his argument.

Though in other writing, MacLeod finds fault with Adam Smith and his many confused, false beliefs, MacLeod praises Smith for his work on free trade.

MacLeod then describes the rise of the dangerous and harmful doctrine of socialism in France.

MacLeod then reveals how “reciprocity” and “fair trade” are merely protectionism under different names.

MacLeod further exposes socialism.

MacLeod reveals the true meaning of value. It's a ratio.

MacLeod reveals that property known as wealth becomes wealth precisely because of trade and by no other means. Said another way, nothing in itself has value but a value arises from the trade rate as expressed by the ratio of one thing traded for another.

MacLeod reveals how the otherwise smart John Locke blew it when it came to economics.

And then MacLeod reveals the errors of Adam Smith, errors that David Ricardo would repeat and from which Karl Marx derived his entire erroneous theory.

MacLeod shows how David Ricardo erred much like Adam Smith. Ricardo's errors provided the basis for Karl Marx's beliefs.

And here MacLeod connects the Socialists with the fallacies of Adam Smith and David Ricardo.

MacLeod shows how the existence of credit exposes the foolishness of socialist belief.

MacLeod sums up his thoughts here.

Read more ...
Blogger Tricks

Thursday, January 29, 2015


Today, few if any Ph.D.s of economics know the history of their field. If they know a history, likely it is one produced of propaganda to support their current false paradigm, a paradigm that fails to describe the reality of trade. Trade, of course, is the purchase and sale of property in pursuit of profit, is the only activity that gives rise to an economy.

It's unlikely that Ph.D.s like Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen much less your local university department staffers would know the connection of Jacob Vanderlint, Dudley North, Aristotle and Socrates to trade if you were to mention those names to them.

In an essay titled, On the Science of Economics and Its Relation to Free Exchange and Socialism, the brilliant banking lawyer Henry Dunning MacLeod gave a brief on the history of the academic field of economics, which all who care to reason about and discuss their lives and their government should know.

MacLeod begins to take down the myth of Adam Smith.

MacLeod reveals the Physiocrats as the founders of modern economics.

MacLeod connects liberty, which is freedom, or that realm where politicians are content to leave alone anyone. Said another way, liberty is the absence of law in the presence of government. And of course, where politicians make no law, there are no right and no corresponding duty.

Here, MacLeod reveals the connection between property, which always means the right of ownership and not what is owned, with liberty, which always means the absence of law in the presence of government.

MacLeod examines the doctrines of the Physiocrats.

MacLeod reveals what the ancients already knew.

MacLeod discusses the strange fallacy of money (coined metal by weight and fineness) as the only wealth.

MacLeod discusses what the Physiocrats had wrong.

MacLeod discusses the rise of Adam Smith.

MacLeod discusses the confusion Adam Smith expressed in his work.

MacLeod discusses the foolishness of J.B. Say, an early hero to those who claim to be adherents of the Austrian School of Neoclassical Economics, which was once known as the Psychology School, but as a school of neoclassical economics, its adherent fail to understand the reality of trade.

MacLeod exposes the foolishness of John Stuart Mill.


Suffice to say, in his day, academicians loathed Henry Dunning MacLeod precisely because the man revealed many expressed fallacies from which academicians of economics espoused their theories.

Today's academicians of economics have compounded their errors by building upon the cherry-picked false foundation of the Physiocrats, Smith, Ricardo, Say, Mill and others who came after and made more mistakes like Alfred Marshall, John Maynard Keynes, Paul Samuelson, and cast of other 20th century clowns. These days, jokers like Paul Krugman and Thomas Piketty preach the false doctrines of economics.

The basis of the academic field of economics is the pseudo-scientific concept of utility, a faux psychological phenomenon never proven. Thus, the entire field as it stands is bogus.

As I explained in WHY IS THE ECONOMY SO HORRIBLE? BECAUSE ACADEMIA ECONOMICS IS FAKE, the entirety of trade, or commerce, or real economics ties up with two words — property and profit. Without profit from effort, anyone would lack buying power to buy anything else. Without property, no one can trade.

Trade, or commerce, or real economics is about acquisition of rights to own stuff. No one can derive satisfaction until that one owns. All talk about pleasure, pain, satiation, utility and the like is irrelevant until acquisition.

All should reject contemporary economics. It's fake. All of its priests, ministers, and preachers are little better than self-deluded con men.

Read more ...