Modeling Adam Smith's Analysis of the Very Severe, Negative Impacts of 'Projectors, Imprudent Risk Takers and Prodigals' on the Macro Economy in the Wealth of Nations Using a Modified Lotka-Volterra Non Linear Coupled Model of Differential Equations

M. E. Brady
{"title":"Modeling Adam Smith's Analysis of the Very Severe, Negative Impacts of 'Projectors, Imprudent Risk Takers and Prodigals' on the Macro Economy in the Wealth of Nations Using a Modified Lotka-Volterra Non Linear Coupled Model of Differential Equations","authors":"M. E. Brady","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3053111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Adam Smith, based on his knowledge of issues originally discussed by Plato (Socrates) and Aristotle, which were related to his own knowledge of how the Tulip Bubble, Mississippi Bubble and South Seas Bubble were created, recognized that problems of economic downturns, inflation and deflation could be directly traced to the economic behavior of three categories of economic decision maker, all of whom were members of the upper income class in an economic state. Adam Smith categorized these three types of economic decision makers as “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals.” Essentially, all three types of economic decision makers in these categories attempted to make profits (money) without the production of any physical good or service. Such individuals attempted to use other people’s money, by leveraging their debt position to obtain bank loans, in order to manipulate the financial titles to physical assets so as to increase the value of the financial asset, irrespective of any increase in the actual underlying value physical asset. Bankers are particularly attracted to such economic decision makers plans because of the possibility of making very quick, short term profits. Any potential long term losses are simply ignored. Following Aristotle’s very advanced understanding of how money use or misuse can positively or negatively impact the macro economy, the goal of projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals is not C-M-C’, but M-C-M’ or M-M’. The latter two types of money use are purely speculative in nature. Smith concluded that these categories of individuals should not receive any access to bank loans since the long run results usually led to bank failure with resulting highly negative outcomes and impacts on the macro economy. \nSmith then contrasts these types of economic agents with individuals he terms the “sober” people. The “sober” people are middle class, small business owners who desire to obtain bank loans in order to expand their existing business and increase their access to needed resources to make and sell more products. These types of individual are using money in the manner, again pointed out by Aristotle, as being C-M-C’, to increase the amount of physical producer and consumer goods they could make in the future. Smith concluded that the great majority of bank credit and loans should be skewed toward these individuals, since this would lead to real economic growth, as opposed to the speculative, purely financial booms and busts engineered by, for instance, projectors such as John Law, Richard Cantillon or Andrew Dexter, Jr. early in the 18th and 19th Centuries. \nSmith conceived of the central bank as being independent of the private banking industry and the government. It could then enforce a policy of refusing to let private banks make loans to “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals”, while simultaneously encouraging the granting of bank loans to the “sober” people. \nThe contrast between a Mitt Romney type of economy ,where the “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals” are able to get bank financing, which they employ for use as speculative finance (M-M’), is contrasted with a George Romney type of economy dominated by the “sober” people, where they employ the C-M-C’ approach to the creation or real, physical wealth. \nA nonlinear, coupled, Volterra model will illustrate mathematically precisely where the problems lie and what needs to be done to prevent future speculative collapse in the financial markets based on Adam Smith’s path breaking analysis in the Wealth of Nations in 1776. This will require that the central bank monitor private banks so as to prevent them from issuing credit/bank loans to the Mitt Romney type of speculative, stock market financier - promoter, while requiring them to issue loans/credit to the George Romney type of sober business man or women. \nA mathematical model is used to illustrate Smith’s view of how banking policy can create economic growth while avoiding the problems of speculative finance that leads to bubbles and crashes, which are the primary cause of the problems of inflation and deflation as banker financed, speculative bubbles are created and then collapse over time.","PeriodicalId":378721,"journal":{"name":"PSN: Other Comparative Capitalism (Topic)","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PSN: Other Comparative Capitalism (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3053111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Adam Smith, based on his knowledge of issues originally discussed by Plato (Socrates) and Aristotle, which were related to his own knowledge of how the Tulip Bubble, Mississippi Bubble and South Seas Bubble were created, recognized that problems of economic downturns, inflation and deflation could be directly traced to the economic behavior of three categories of economic decision maker, all of whom were members of the upper income class in an economic state. Adam Smith categorized these three types of economic decision makers as “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals.” Essentially, all three types of economic decision makers in these categories attempted to make profits (money) without the production of any physical good or service. Such individuals attempted to use other people’s money, by leveraging their debt position to obtain bank loans, in order to manipulate the financial titles to physical assets so as to increase the value of the financial asset, irrespective of any increase in the actual underlying value physical asset. Bankers are particularly attracted to such economic decision makers plans because of the possibility of making very quick, short term profits. Any potential long term losses are simply ignored. Following Aristotle’s very advanced understanding of how money use or misuse can positively or negatively impact the macro economy, the goal of projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals is not C-M-C’, but M-C-M’ or M-M’. The latter two types of money use are purely speculative in nature. Smith concluded that these categories of individuals should not receive any access to bank loans since the long run results usually led to bank failure with resulting highly negative outcomes and impacts on the macro economy. Smith then contrasts these types of economic agents with individuals he terms the “sober” people. The “sober” people are middle class, small business owners who desire to obtain bank loans in order to expand their existing business and increase their access to needed resources to make and sell more products. These types of individual are using money in the manner, again pointed out by Aristotle, as being C-M-C’, to increase the amount of physical producer and consumer goods they could make in the future. Smith concluded that the great majority of bank credit and loans should be skewed toward these individuals, since this would lead to real economic growth, as opposed to the speculative, purely financial booms and busts engineered by, for instance, projectors such as John Law, Richard Cantillon or Andrew Dexter, Jr. early in the 18th and 19th Centuries. Smith conceived of the central bank as being independent of the private banking industry and the government. It could then enforce a policy of refusing to let private banks make loans to “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals”, while simultaneously encouraging the granting of bank loans to the “sober” people. The contrast between a Mitt Romney type of economy ,where the “projectors, imprudent risk takers and prodigals” are able to get bank financing, which they employ for use as speculative finance (M-M’), is contrasted with a George Romney type of economy dominated by the “sober” people, where they employ the C-M-C’ approach to the creation or real, physical wealth. A nonlinear, coupled, Volterra model will illustrate mathematically precisely where the problems lie and what needs to be done to prevent future speculative collapse in the financial markets based on Adam Smith’s path breaking analysis in the Wealth of Nations in 1776. This will require that the central bank monitor private banks so as to prevent them from issuing credit/bank loans to the Mitt Romney type of speculative, stock market financier - promoter, while requiring them to issue loans/credit to the George Romney type of sober business man or women. A mathematical model is used to illustrate Smith’s view of how banking policy can create economic growth while avoiding the problems of speculative finance that leads to bubbles and crashes, which are the primary cause of the problems of inflation and deflation as banker financed, speculative bubbles are created and then collapse over time.
亚当·斯密在《国富论》中对“预测者、轻率的冒险者和浪子”对宏观经济的非常严重的负面影响的分析——用一个修正的Lotka-Volterra非线性耦合微分方程模型建模
亚当·斯密根据他对柏拉图(苏格拉底)和亚里士多德最初讨论的问题的了解,这些问题与他自己对郁金香泡沫、密西西比泡沫和南海泡沫是如何产生的了解有关,认识到经济衰退、通货膨胀和通货紧缩的问题可以直接追溯到三类经济决策者的经济行为,他们都是经济国家中高收入阶层的成员。亚当·斯密将这三种类型的经济决策者归类为“预测者、轻率的冒险者和浪子”。从本质上讲,这三种类型的经济决策者都试图在不生产任何实物商品或服务的情况下赚取利润(金钱)。这些人试图利用别人的钱,利用自己的债务头寸来获得银行贷款,从而操纵实物资产的金融所有权,从而增加金融资产的价值,而不考虑实物资产的实际潜在价值的任何增加。银行家对这种经济决策者的计划特别感兴趣,因为有可能在短期内迅速获利。任何潜在的长期损失都会被忽略。根据亚里士多德对货币使用或滥用如何对宏观经济产生积极或消极影响的非常先进的理解,预测者、轻率的冒险者和浪子的目标不是C-M-C ',而是M-C-M '或M-M '。后两种类型的货币使用是纯粹的投机性质。史密斯的结论是,这些类别的个人不应该获得任何银行贷款,因为长期的结果通常会导致银行倒闭,从而导致高度负面的结果和对宏观经济的影响。然后,史密斯将这些类型的经济主体与他称之为“清醒”的人进行了对比。“清醒”的人是中产阶级、小企业主,他们希望获得银行贷款,以扩大现有业务,增加获得所需资源的机会,以生产和销售更多产品。这些类型的个人使用货币的方式,亚里士多德再次指出,是C-M-C,来增加他们未来可以生产的实物生产者和消费品的数量。史密斯的结论是,绝大多数银行信贷和贷款应该向这些个人倾斜,因为这将导致真正的经济增长,而不是由约翰·劳、理查德·坎蒂隆或小安德鲁·德克斯特等人在18世纪和19世纪早期策划的投机、纯粹的金融繁荣和萧条。斯密设想中央银行独立于私人银行业和政府之外。然后,它可以执行一项政策,拒绝让私人银行向“放债者、轻率的冒险者和挥霍者”发放贷款,同时鼓励银行向“清醒”的人发放贷款。米特·罗姆尼类型的经济与乔治·罗姆尼类型的经济形成鲜明对比,前者是“放映者、轻率的冒险者和浪子”能够获得银行融资,并将其用作投机融资(M-M),后者是由“清醒”的人主导的,他们采用C-M-C的方法来创造真正的物质财富。根据亚当·斯密1776年在《国富论》中开创性的分析,一个非线性的、耦合的沃尔泰拉模型将从数学上精确地说明问题在哪里,以及需要做些什么来防止未来金融市场的投机性崩溃。这将要求中央银行对私人银行进行监督,以防止它们向米特·罗姆尼(Mitt Romney)类型的投机、股票市场金融家-发起人发放信贷/银行贷款,同时要求它们向乔治·罗姆尼(George Romney)类型的清醒商人发放贷款/信贷。一个数学模型被用来说明史密斯的观点,即银行政策如何创造经济增长,同时避免导致泡沫和崩溃的投机金融问题,这是银行家资助的通货膨胀和通货紧缩问题的主要原因,投机泡沫被创造出来,然后随着时间的推移而崩溃。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信