Production Possibilities Frontier (PPF) Pond Ripple Analogy.

Go to the economic literature and see if you can find more than a quadrant of a two dimensional figure to describe the production possibilities frontier.

Where does the production possibilities frontier come from and how is it related to the economy as a whole? As it is used in economics it is basically a much simplified 'either/or' exposition. It is a ceteris paribus construct that demonstrates how the limits within the economy constrains the choices to more of one at the expense of less of the other.

This is the status of contemporary economics and yet when I mention that there is a new economic theory out there (that I call the divine economy theory) these same economists chuckle under their breath or in one way or another do not deign to regard it as possible (to even the slightest degree).

Well maybe when they are educated about where the production possibilities frontier comes from (not historically in the literature but in the broad picture of the economy) then at least some of them will be astounded at the magnitude of the different conceptual knowledge gained from the divine economy theory.

This is where the pond ripple analogy comes in. Now go back to the two-dimensional quadrant and imagine it as a part of the pond ripples where the intersection of the x and y axes is the point where the pebble entered the water. And imagine that you take a snapshot in time where the arc goes from one point on the y axis to a point on the x axis and voila you have what is considered the 'state of the art' production possibilities frontier!

What you do not have in your snapshot are the other three quadrants which would combine to make up the four quadrants of a circle. Necessarily absent also then is the concept that defines what that circle is.

And what you also do not have are the other dimensions, which in the divine economy theory include the third, the fourth, and the fifth dimension. In the divine economy theory the fifth dimension is time and so instead of a snapshot it would be a video!

Just like Roger Garrison shows in his work - that the production possibilities frontier can either expand in an unhampered economy or shrink if there is interventionism - the divine economy theory uses the production possibilities frontier to show the favorable or not-so-favorable consequences of both laissez-faire and interventionism, respectively.

Economists that ignore - out of ignorance or pride or prejudice - the divine economy theory are becoming obsolete as evidenced by the production possibilities frontier pond ripple analogy! I suggest investigating the divine economy theory. What is there to be afraid of?

Follow me on Twitter @DivineEconomy

If you know of anyone interested in ethics and economics,
or liberty and justice, please send them this link:
http://bruce-koerber.squarespace.com

What Is Meant By The "Ego-Driven" Terminology In The Divine Economy Theory?

Here is how ego-driven intervention (or interpretation) fits in: Having partial or finite knowledge is part of the natural law of human beings. They are and never were and never will be omnipresent about that which surrounds them and of course the future is uncertain to them and so in terms of the effects over time they have never had, nor have they, nor will they ever have, knowledge that is omniscient. To take action with finite knowledge - which interferes with the dynamics of a system that is of an infinite nature - and which would ultimately affect other humans unjustly (because the arbitrary decision is error-based), in disregard for others, is certainly egotistic. In other words, only someone who is ego-driven (for whatever reason: out of ignorance or out of the lust for power, etc.) can have the audacity to try to impose their limited and narrow understanding of "how things should work' on others.

This is in contrast to the non-ego-driven behavior which comes from the recognition that there is no moral authority to alter that which is divine (infinitely complex and operating by invisible forces that can be described as having qualities such as grace, unity, justice, bounty, mercy, peace, etc.). The forces of economic equilibrium are operable and powerful and symmetric and reciprocating in ways that are incomprehensible, and are completely and truly independent of human interference. Only someone who is ego-driven would substitute their narrow arbitrary view for a magnificent, all-encompassing potency.

Follow me on Twitter @DivineEconomy

If you know of anyone interested in ethics and economics,
or liberty and justice, please send them this link:
http://bruce-koerber.squarespace.com

Government As Seen By Mises And In The Divine Economy Theory.

Minarchists agree with this statement by Ludwig von Mises:

"Government, i.e, a social apparatus of coercion and compulsion, is a necessary requisite of peaceful cooperation. The market economy cannot do without a police power safeguarding its smooth functioning by the threat or the application of violence against peace-breakers” (Human Action, p. 324).

The key to understanding this in the context of the divine economy theory is to acknowledge that the difference between the State and the government is the perversion resulting from ego-driven intervention (using, or should I say abusing, the coercive powers of government) and subsequently (or precedently) justified by ego-driven interpretation.
 

This difference between them can be best understood using new terminology. The divine economy theory introduces the terminology of 'ego-driven interventionism' and 'ego-driven interpretation' which is an advancement in economic science because it not only explains the deviation from the free market, but also since it identifies the disease, it suggests ways to remedy this malady through education and through acknowledging that inviolable property rights are human rights.

Government as a contractual agreement - using an assessment to pay for services rendered by the created administrative entity - is merely one of many different means that can be used to accomplish the ends chosen. This chosen means - government as described above by Mises - can still be voluntarily chosen as part of the consultative process in a society as long as there is no coercion preventing people from leaving that jurisdiction or no coercion to prevent other means from being tested in the effort to find the best means.

Follow me on Twitter @DivineEconomy

If you know of anyone interested in ethics and economics,
or liberty and justice, please send them this link:
http://bruce-koerber.squarespace.com