Seeking Alpha

Chris Ridder

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Chris Ridder's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    mises.org/daily/5052/D...
    Mar 1, 2011. 04:54 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Here is some good analysis about Japan and other Macro thinking
    www.scribd.com/doc/488...
    Feb 18, 2011. 01:59 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Here is my reply to Tim Ayles Ad Hominem response which deals with the facts and issues:

    seekingalpha.com/insta...
    Feb 17, 2011. 01:38 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Here is my response to this ad hominem post. My reply deals with the issues and data dealing with Austrian vs MMT Theory.

    seekingalpha.com/insta...
    Feb 17, 2011. 12:21 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Here is my most recent piece:
    seekingalpha.com/insta...
    Feb 17, 2011. 12:17 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    My piece coming out will only attempt to discuss and analyze the topics and ideas in this article and the response to it. No overt Ad hominem attacks.
    Feb 14, 2011. 08:23 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    I will have a more thorough response in another article, but until that is finished this will have to suffice.

    The author sates, "...I would challenge you to instead value the candy bar in hours of labor to obtain it." This is equating the value of something as being equal to the labor put in. I believe what the author meant to discuss was real wage rates, but because of the unclear writing the author stumbled into this fallacy.

    If we follow the statement "...value the candy bar in hours of labor to obtain it". The the price of the candy bar should be equal to exactly the same hour of labor for everyone. So let's say I have a job as a life guard at Newport Beach, you have a job at the sanitation department, and someone else is a professional football player. One can see how nonsensical this becomes when my hour of labor of watching girls at the beach is equal in value to an hour of your labor cleaning toilets, which is equal to an hour playing a football game. Now I know my example is different then the author's but it is consistent with the stated premise he uses.

    Notice the wage rate was left out of the article. Clumsy wording and not just plainly stating and discussing the well known economic theory of real wages left the position taken in the article open to criticism. I tried to show readers this by stating, "I only hope the author was intending to discuss real wages and unfortunately used poor wording that accidentally came out as in favor for the labor theory of value."
    Feb 14, 2011. 05:11 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Aurorus Borealis if you like economic history you might like to check out this title: An Austrian Perspective on the History of Economic Thought. You can find the pdf on the web for free.
    Feb 11, 2011. 08:04 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Going to the top of the article it appears Dr. Murphy might have been just using the Keynesian algebra to fright Krugman on his own grounds. Silly me for skipping to the quoted part first and not the beginning; I guess trying to do things to fast on a Friday afternoon before the weekend ;-)

    "Krugman Falls into the Keynesian Accounting Trap

    It's one thing to criticize Paul Krugman for his views on Austrian economics, but only a brave soul would have the temerity to question Krugman's discussion of the Keynesian approach to international trade, right? Since Krugman is the world's most famous living Keynesian, and he won the Nobel (Memorial) Prize for his work on trade theory, accusing him of a basic error on this score would be akin to telling Madonna she knows nothing of pop music.

    Even so, in a recent blog post Krugman's advocacy for deficit spending leads him to commit a basic fallacy when discussing economic output and trade. What's really ironic is that Krugman has previously exposed this particular fallacy when others made it! That the master Keynesian was vulnerable to such a naïve mistake justifies the Austrian warning that focusing on equations of aggregate variables is the wrong approach in economics."

    from mises.org/daily/3945
    Feb 11, 2011. 06:35 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    this is before the quote from the article you mentioned:
    The Keynesian view says that one way to measure total economic output (Y) is to add up total spending on consumption (C), investment (I), government purchases (G), and net exports (X − M). This leads to the equation: Y = C + I + G + (X − M)

    Now I am not sure if Dr. Murphy is using this algebra because he believes in it or if he uses it to fight on Krugman's own ground and show him by his own rules, he is in error. Anyways, other Austrians write about the problems of the immense aggregation that the Keynesians use.
    Feb 11, 2011. 06:28 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    pdrub of course I studied the typical Keynesian algebra. Can't go to the LSE and not study that stuff. You can see various Austrian objections at mises.org
    Feb 11, 2011. 05:40 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    It would appear that throwing Bernanke into this discussion is a straw man argument.

    Rothbard's understanding of the question about monetary theory according to pdrub was the question. Having a PhD from an Ivy League school, such as Columbia, would I believe give an everyday person the belief that one would have the mental faculties and rigor to comprehend in a thoughtful way macroeconomics and central banking. That was the reason to point out Dr. Rothbard's education and explain that the short quote was not comprehensive of all his economic reasoning.
    Feb 11, 2011. 05:31 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    pdrub:
    First, the quote you pointed to was from Murray Rothbard who had a PhD in economics from Columbia. I think he understood what he was writing about. I have seen other writings where he explained the process in more detail but are of course in much greater length. This post, as I stated, was a "brief reply".

    Second, by stopping reading you missed this irrefutable mistake the author made:
    " "Granted, China is growing at roughly 10% a year, and we are only growing at 3%. I get that. Let's do the math though and see if we should worry. If China is a $6 trillion economy, growing at 10%, they grow by $600 billion a year. If we are a $14 trillion economy growing at 3%, we grow by $420 billion a year. In this close to reality example, China is closing the gap at $180 billion a year. At this rate - it will take China 44 years to even match the US in GDP. Can they continue to grow at 10% a year, while their largest customer grows at 3% for 44 straight year? We are a far cry from no longer being the largest economy. The biggest economy in the world should be blessed with the reserve currency."

    I took $14 trillion and grew it at a 3% rate in a spreadsheet and then took $6 trillion in a spreadsheet and grew it at 10% a year. One will find that if the 3% and 10% growth rates hold then in only 13 years (from a base year of zero) the Chinese economy would surpass the U.S. economy. This is much lower than 44 years, actually less than 30% of the time! It appears the author forgot to compound the growth rates but just used the difference in the first year to compute a timeline. Finally, the OECD showed that the EU-27 had a larger economy than the U.S. in 2009. "

    Third, my undergraduate economic studies (not a degree) were at the London School of Economics and by Dr. Alex Taber, a professor with a PhD from the University of Chicago. My Masters degree is from Cass Business School at City University of London. So I won't be jumping onto the latest fad coming out of academia in much of a hurry. LOL
    Feb 11, 2011. 04:35 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    I think you meant to say Brent at a $16 prem. to WTI crude oil. I think it might mean the north sea is depleted much more than us Americans realize. So soon WTI will be physically arbed off to europe went the spread is high enough to cover the transportantion costs. Any physical oil traders out there to provide greater insight???
    Feb 11, 2011. 04:09 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post [View article]
    Yes this could go on for a while when I reply and we get "Debunking the 'Debunking the 'Debunking the 'Debunking Myths of U.S. Collapse' Post' Post' Post" ;-)
    Feb 11, 2011. 12:28 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
168 Comments
75 Likes