Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site topaz.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!josh
From: josh@topaz.ARPA (J Storrs Hall)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Business Cycles -- Note to Gadfly:Re to DKmcK
Message-ID: <1976@topaz.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 13-May-85 22:16:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.1976
Posted: Mon May 13 22:16:32 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 14-May-85 23:58:22 EDT
References: <1146@ratex.UUCP> <632@whuxl.UUCP>
Reply-To: josh@topaz.UUCP (J Storrs Hall)
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 25

In article <632@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
>Come now, Dan, surely you jest.

 Is "Surely you jest" the new rallying cry of the Socialists?

>In order for there to be *no* economic cycles whatsoever the
>system would have to be *constantly* at the exact equilibrium point.

This is complete, utter, total, absolute bullshit.  A system oscillates
if it is underdamped;  if it is overdamped (or critically damped) it
moves towards equilibrium asymptotically;  under no circumstances
does it sit constantly at the equilibrium.
 
>"There is no way for the human body to ever have high-blood pressure,
> diabetes, or other such ills except for interference from the
> brain!"
>                       tim sevener   whuxl!orb

The business cycle is more aptly compared to the effects on a drug
addict's body of his alternately overdosing and going cold turkey.
The Keynesian "prescription" for this condition is an even, smoothly
but constantly increasing dosage.  After all, in the long run we are
all dead.

--JoSH