PK> no conventional economist picked this current world wide
PK> recession/depression.  So much for conventional economics.

Yes, and thats PRECISELY the problem, the predictive capability is
very poor. So you inevitably get economic cycles, because you cant
predict what will happen, so you cant adjust the economic leaves to
ensure they dont. QED, you have a problem for which no one has yet
found a solution, tho we have managed to control the system rather
better than we used to be able to. The entire world economy went
down the tubes after the 1929 crash, we had learnt a bit since
then and that did not happen with the 1987 crash.

PK> Bob, Bob do yourself a favour and read one of the few men who did
PK> pick it, and fully EXPLAIN the onset of economic collapse.  All the
PK> facts are tightly argued in The Recovery Myth by Bryan Kavanagh.

And as Bob said, people said that about Marx and Engels. It even
appeared to be a convincing line of argument too. Entire societys
tried their prescription. It took something like 100 years to conclude
that it was a nice theory, pity about the reality. They made PRECISELY
the same claims about fixing the deficiencys of capitalism and economic
cycles. They got it wrong, they had no solution, whatever they claimed,
no matter how convincing their argument was. It was a dud tho.

PK> He makes the case that increasing levels of taxation always lead to a
PK> dampening of productive economic activity and a rise in speculation.

Thats a completely silly proposition for starters. In the times of
small government, and much lower overall taxation we actually saw
the worst excesses of speculation. At times it went completely mad.
So much for that silly line.

PK> The speculative bubble always bursts following the peak of land booms.

Thats a silly proposition too. By definition you get speculative bubbles
bursting after booms. Thats just another way of saying you have economic
cycles. Not just land booms either.

PK> His arguments are not just theory,

Welp, you certainly havent cited any evidence which substantiates his
claims, and in fact like the one above the evidence readily available
blows great holes thru his theorys.

PK> levels of taxation are compared against the national income and the
PK> real estate market. The case is made in facts, charts and figures.

Pity he ignores the fact which refute his argument then, the days
when taxation levels were MUCH lower than they are today, with MUCH
more speculation. Some of the stuff seen last century was very
spectacular. Relatively low taxation, lots of speculation, his theory
going up in flames.

PK> A reading of the book might put an end to pointless and conventional
PK> rantings.

Thats what they always said about Marx and Engels too. It turned out to
be a dud theory tho.

--- PQWK202