It came out yesterday.
Macroeconomics, which is the branch of economics that purports to connect fiscal stimulus with employment, tries to ignore the evolution of PSST. Interestingly, macroeconomics straddles the too-concrete thinking of the public and the too-abstract thinking of the academic elite.
The essay is based on my new book, which rose to #1 on Amazon in the narrow category of macroeconomics.
Would you rather comments there, or here?
Your article discusses the need to create more jobs.
The word “entrepreneur” is too long and awkward. It’s too bad there’s not a better word: “enper”, “entrepper”? Something shorter, simple. “En” as a start would be a good connection to the past.
You contrast those whose understanding of economics is concrete with those whose understanding is abstract. As you point out, however, at the bottom of the abstract understanding is a naive concrete view of the economy as a factory or car. Push the priming button three times, or set the choke and it will sputter to life. Come to think of it these analogies are more appropriate to a car in the 30’s than today.