tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post618952344356276608..comments2024-03-12T22:19:32.339-04:00Comments on The New Arthurian Economics: The Economist gets it wrongThe Arthurianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-49971076432765363952013-09-22T11:49:59.759-04:002013-09-22T11:49:59.759-04:00my point being that the guy buying a *new* home th...my point being that the guy buying a *new* home these days needs extra help to make it happen: "Today, a whole chain of transactions is required so that one fellow can afford to put up a new house!"<br />The Arthurianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16501331051089400601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2098432983500045934.post-36601285179475648382013-09-22T11:46:33.559-04:002013-09-22T11:46:33.559-04:00The Economist article talks about transactions for...The Economist article talks about transactions for existing assets as not helping the economy to make fuller use of its "productive capacity". This seems pretty clear. A ten year old house used "productive capacity" ten years ago and it got counted then.<br /><br />I could be wrong but the way you say quote productive unquote seems to imply productive in the sense of useful vs useless. That's not what GDP means, not what it counts.<br />geerussellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10631984593634015839noreply@blogger.com