Friday, February 27, 2015

I think cyclical

There are two ways of looking at the economy.

One way is to see it as a barrel full of loose ends and disconnected acts. The other is to see the economy's behavior as cyclical. When I read Ferdinand Lot --
In the seventh century, the right of coinage, the royal prerogative par excellence, passed over to the episcopal or monastic churches or to private persons; the treasury perhaps still collected part of the profits of coining. Mints multiplied in the cities, "chateau" (castra), vici, and even mere villas. The history of the coinage shows in a striking fashion the disintegration of the royal power.
I think Fall of Rome. Decentralization of power. Dark Age. I think those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I think cyclical.

When I read JP Koning --
Let's gradually privatize the issuance of paper currency. If anyone can make cash relevant again, it's innovators in the private sector.
Koning sees the world as loose ends and disconnected acts. I think Fall of Rome...


The Arthurian said...

If you only look at current events, as Koning does, it is impossible to see long cyclical patterns.

But the question, for me, is not whether the seventh century trend (the right of coinage passing over to private persons) is echoed in Koning's thoughts.

The question is, what drives the economy toward the sovereign right of coinage, then away from it, then toward it again, and now away from it again. That is the question.

My answer: Long-term trends in concentration and dispersion of wealth are the driving force.

The Arthurian said...

Or perhaps not "the driving force." But long-term trends in the concentration and dispersion of wealth change the economic environment. They change the way the playing field is tilted, creating a general movement in different directions in different epochs.