Marginal Propensity to Consume 06: “Irrational Expectations”

 

Exogenous to “Failed Nations,” we in aggregate save only for the purpose of enhancing creative efficiencies in the coming years. Again, with population growth on hold, the problem of individual life cycle is irrelevant to the aggregate economic cycle.

Necessity of GDP Growth. On the demand side, there are largely two drives for the national income per annum per capita to grow over the years expected to arrive. First, we have a dream of better future owing to ever-effective individual demand for utilities. If history is any guide, human desires do not recognize the limit.

             Second, we wish to outlive the individual wealth, which might be called “precautionary motive.” This leads to positive bequests of wealth in aggregate or in terms of average per capita on the way of crossing the River. The collective “bequests” in everyday language are an inevitable consequence of “uncertainties” when the eventual moment on the River of no return will be.

Imperfectly Rational. Yes, expectations are supposedly "rational" in macroeconomics. A thorn: We are imperfectly “rational” in the first person and simply irrational in the second or third person. The head, “‘m rational”; the tail, “you guys are irrational.” No to mention, the “coin” (in the orthodox sense) is “fair” no matter who the tossing person, me, you, her or him; no matter whether the tossing is from the right or the left hand.

             If everyone were "Lucasian rational," there wouldn’t be precautionary saving in forms of investing in assets, physical or human. Voila, the imperfection in rationality is one of the drivers that keep us getting wealthier. After all, physical frictions keep our life physically feasible, much like thorns do to roses. Oh wait, “uncertainties” in plain English, or “risks” in Finance jargon, end up helping promote our quality of life over the run of time, if not of distance. Is it not what we learn from Economics and Finance, if not from macroeconomics?  

             A conventional wisdom in the West: Be irrational and “Go West, young man!” Another in the East: “Pure water never fosters fish.” We’d better not try to be perfect. Incidentally, there is an episode or an apocrypha that a lawyer of summa-cum-laude from the Princeton Law School was fired by her clients because she always tried to be perfect in writing legal documents. It’s the time duration, stupid!

             “See, I Told You So.”

Fallacy of Composition, Conversed. Demand of the individual household for “real products” is always and everywhere “effective.” As such, the super-popular “ineffective aggregate demand” must be an arch-typical case of “fallacy of composition” Paul Samuelson talks about (Economics, 1948).


Sufficiency for GDP Growth. The rest of us are very much well aware what the sufficient condition for real “macroeconomic” growth. Guess what out of the gross national income (Y in monetary) such a condition is: Consumption (C), “leisure,” “indolence,” “fiscal spending for the purpose of spending” (G) or the gross national saving (S in monetary)?

         Honey, now I regret pointing fingers at the “S” also called “thrift.” Such blaming must have been paradoxical at best, misleading at least, or something else at worst.  


The “We-Have-a-Dream,” U-Ltd.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Procrustean Art of Backtracking: “Dimensions in Economics”

Velocity Wanted: A Trade-off in Eternity

Saving "the Market” out of Cambridge: “Roles of Government”