Definitions by abu yahya
quis est beneficium
Latin, "where is the benefit?" A type of logical fallacy in which one claims one didn't do something bad because it was not in one's interests to do so. An example would be, "Why would I steal from the cash register? It's going to hurt the business if I do, and then I might lose my job."
The argument is usually used on behalf of someone else: for example, Ludo Martens (1995) argues that Stalin could not possibly have massacred millions of Russians because he needed them to fight WW2; Fogel & Engermann claimed* that American slavery was not very bad because it was in the best interests of slaveowners to have content slaves.
The argument is a fallacy because it assumes that all relevant motives of the actor are well-established, and lead away from the act. It does not account for motives like personal hatred, shame, fear, spite, ideology, and so on.
________________________
* In *Time on the Cross* (1971); the book was conclusively debunked by David & Stampp, *Reckoning with Slavery* (1976).
The argument is usually used on behalf of someone else: for example, Ludo Martens (1995) argues that Stalin could not possibly have massacred millions of Russians because he needed them to fight WW2; Fogel & Engermann claimed* that American slavery was not very bad because it was in the best interests of slaveowners to have content slaves.
The argument is a fallacy because it assumes that all relevant motives of the actor are well-established, and lead away from the act. It does not account for motives like personal hatred, shame, fear, spite, ideology, and so on.
________________________
* In *Time on the Cross* (1971); the book was conclusively debunked by David & Stampp, *Reckoning with Slavery* (1976).
One frequently encounters *quis est beneficium?* arguments among Holocaust deniers of all stripes. Among such worthies it is claimed that Hitler/Stalin/Enver Pasha could not possibly have wanted to massacre all those millions because it was a nuisance to try.
quis est beneficium by Abu Yahya February 14, 2009
Keynesian
influenced by the economic theory of John M. Keynes (1883-1946); in particular, Keynes' book *The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money* (1936). The main point of Keynes' general theory (GT) was that market economies are not usually self-correcting, and occasionally require some sovereign intervention to prevent inflation or depression.
One of the policy prescriptions of the GT for curing recessions was to lower interest rates; another, more potent tool, was to deliberately run a fiscal deficit as a strategy for increasing aggregate demand. The GT was too late to have much of an impact on the Great Depression, but it did have a major impact on the economic policies of the Western Democracies from 1946 to the present.
During the period 1979 to 2001, Keynesianism was supposedly discredited, but national governments continued to use stimulus packages and monetary policy to resolve recessions. The policy has evolved, but remains the cornerstone of actually existing government behavior.
Attacks on Keynesianism: the most famous adversary of the GT was Friedrich von Hayek (1899-1992) of the London School of Economics, who insisted that an authentically free market would be self-correcting if it were only allowed to. Hayek's objections were ideological, but other economists such as John Muth argued that the GT expected people to make irrational, or unreasonable errors.
During the late 1970's, Keynesianism was eclipsed by the Rational Expectations Hypothesis; but REH failed to develop satisfactory policy proposals, while Neo-Keynesian economics evolved to address many of the original REH criticisms.
One of the policy prescriptions of the GT for curing recessions was to lower interest rates; another, more potent tool, was to deliberately run a fiscal deficit as a strategy for increasing aggregate demand. The GT was too late to have much of an impact on the Great Depression, but it did have a major impact on the economic policies of the Western Democracies from 1946 to the present.
During the period 1979 to 2001, Keynesianism was supposedly discredited, but national governments continued to use stimulus packages and monetary policy to resolve recessions. The policy has evolved, but remains the cornerstone of actually existing government behavior.
Attacks on Keynesianism: the most famous adversary of the GT was Friedrich von Hayek (1899-1992) of the London School of Economics, who insisted that an authentically free market would be self-correcting if it were only allowed to. Hayek's objections were ideological, but other economists such as John Muth argued that the GT expected people to make irrational, or unreasonable errors.
During the late 1970's, Keynesianism was eclipsed by the Rational Expectations Hypothesis; but REH failed to develop satisfactory policy proposals, while Neo-Keynesian economics evolved to address many of the original REH criticisms.
misery index
a number that is the sum of the unemployment rate and the inflation rate. It reflects the overall caliber of a country's prior economic management.
The term was coined by Arthur Okun and was inspired by the Phillips Curve.
The term was coined by Arthur Okun and was inspired by the Phillips Curve.
During the 1980's and '90's, Austria had the lowest misery index in the world. Unemployment rates AND inflation rates were almost nil.
misery index by Abu Yahya February 14, 2009
Phillips Curve
a graph correlating inflation against unemployment rates. Using a horizontal axis to represent unemployment, and a vertical axis to represent inflation, A.W. Phillips found the rate of inflation and unemployment in Great Britain for every year between 1861 and 1957. When he had plotted the 97 dots on the chart, he had a rather neat hyperbola convex to the origin of the graph.
In other words, if the rate of unemployment was low, the rate of inflation was high, and vice versa. At the time, economists concluded that this was a logical outcome of both being influenced by the rate of interest: if interest rates were low, then unemployment would be low and prices would rise, but if interest rates were high then there would be lots of unemployment and workers would not have much money to spend... so prices would go down.
Unfortunately, when economists tried to design policy around this concept they disrupted the smooth relationship. In the years since the 1960's, there has not been a straightforward relationship, and Keynesian economics has had to be drastically revised to a post-Phillips Curve regime.
There is some correlation between inflation and unemployment, but the correlation is much more complicated than originally thought. It is quite possible to have high unemployment and high inflation (i.e., a high "misery index").
In other words, if the rate of unemployment was low, the rate of inflation was high, and vice versa. At the time, economists concluded that this was a logical outcome of both being influenced by the rate of interest: if interest rates were low, then unemployment would be low and prices would rise, but if interest rates were high then there would be lots of unemployment and workers would not have much money to spend... so prices would go down.
Unfortunately, when economists tried to design policy around this concept they disrupted the smooth relationship. In the years since the 1960's, there has not been a straightforward relationship, and Keynesian economics has had to be drastically revised to a post-Phillips Curve regime.
There is some correlation between inflation and unemployment, but the correlation is much more complicated than originally thought. It is quite possible to have high unemployment and high inflation (i.e., a high "misery index").
The Phillips Curve implies a trade-off between unemployment and inflation. Unfortunately, this trade-off may sometimes represent more of a Faustian bargain.
Phillips Curve by Abu Yahya February 14, 2009
trimmer
A person who refines political views to accommodate the prevailing winds; particularly, one who contrives self-serving excuses for political views now generally recognized to have been stupid.
In journalism, the current handwringer-in-chief is the New Yorker writer George Packer, whose book *The Assassins' Gate* has met with high praise from ... a subset of pundits I call trimmers... trimmers criticize ... the foolish president, but avoid unequivocal denunciations of this foolish war.
--John R, MacArthur, "Pro-War Liberals Frozen in the Headlights"
--John R, MacArthur, "Pro-War Liberals Frozen in the Headlights"
monetize
to introduce a thing as currency, e.g., silver, gold, copper. In nearly all cases, when something has been monetized, it is legal tender and debtors are legally obligated to accept it as payment for debt.
Debt can also be monetized. A government can either buy the debt of companies whose growth it favors as a matter of policy (as in pre-War Japan) or permit its own bonds to be be used as banking reserves (for the creation of money).
Debt can also be monetized. A government can either buy the debt of companies whose growth it favors as a matter of policy (as in pre-War Japan) or permit its own bonds to be be used as banking reserves (for the creation of money).
curmudgeon's fallacy
The belief efforts to protect people from calamity will only lead to them being more careless, and bringing on more calamity.
This is a fallacy because it (a) assumes people can adjust personal risk to replicate an incomparable situation, and (b) it confusing risk-taking and risky behavior. "Risk-taking" is a neutral term that includes anything that increases risk in some way, such as operating a machine at a higher speed. This usually is done to get some other benefit. "Risky behavior" is foolish, feckless, or sloppy behavior that has no intrinsic utility to the person engaging in it.
This is a fallacy because it (a) assumes people can adjust personal risk to replicate an incomparable situation, and (b) it confusing risk-taking and risky behavior. "Risk-taking" is a neutral term that includes anything that increases risk in some way, such as operating a machine at a higher speed. This usually is done to get some other benefit. "Risky behavior" is foolish, feckless, or sloppy behavior that has no intrinsic utility to the person engaging in it.
An example of the curmudgeon's fallacy is the erroneous claim that safer cars make for careless drivers.
curmudgeon's fallacy by Abu Yahya October 19, 2008