Indices an accurate measure of the market, enough to base interest

The idea of matching the progressing or regressing real income of individuals against a basket of commodities has been going on in economics since time immemorial. Since the days of Smith when he would essentially equate wages in gold to corn, whether paid in kind or not, to the days of Ricardo, when he renounced all methods of Smith as futile because grossly innacurate, and said that a matched basket of commodities would do better, has the concept of an 'index' been the subject of much debate. What should a basket of commodities be? Do you think the interest rate varies so much for different goods and for different goods having different covariations the concept of an index to determine the effect on wages and interest rates is, like Von Mises said, pointless?
The idea of matching subjectivity in individualist valuations in this sense versus an objective, clean stance of objective, nominal valuation seems obvious and even practical. The issue, no doubt, becomes a theoretical on, not one of practicality: are you willing to accept some variability of an individual's judgment for a valuation which becomes objectively valuable, or are you going to take a conservative approach to measuring average real costs of living and say that it is inconsequential because the central bank, as opposed to the value of money, is the facility that sets the rate of interest.

This is brings us to another discussion entirely consisting of whether or not the unit of measurement and what is being utilized for money has a tremendous effect on the interest or not. My determination in this area is that whether you take Mises' or Fisher's approach to the interest rates, what comes out on top is ultimately theory and nothing more. For instance, the application of a central bank-of-issue approach to the Currency theory implies that you will derive a top down approach towards interest rate determinations, and deriving the interest rate from the amount of real interest applied to a basket of commodities plus the expected depreciation from the monetary unit implies an interest theory which is more determinative, that is dependent on subjective valuations of other goods matched against others in the first place. Ironically, it seems the second theory is more practical, but idyllic, since the Federal Reserve is ultimately who sets the interest rates. Theoretically, no matter how basic and fundamentally simplistic an idea this is, it must be respected in economic theory due to the effects the institutions who control the monetary supply might have.

bump for actual economics, from someone who reads economics.

>>2047621
I'm sorry, I didn't bother to read your wall of text because I assume you are someone who doesn't know actual economics due to your picture.

Also, to add to this, it seems Von Mises even recognizes that the State interest rate can, and frequently is, below or above the natural rate for a prolonged period of time. Under fiat currencies and a gold-exchange standard this is only possible due to the duties on importation of foreign gold or redemption funds consisting of foreign gold in their seignorage ready to be traded locally to avoid shipping costs, and so on. This latter concept could be applied for foreign currency just as easily. The former having a tendency to increase interest beyond what it would normally be, that latter having a tendency to depress interest beyond the equilibrium point.

>>2047679
>PRAXEOLOGY

>>2047706
This whole thread is about two different viewpoints matched up against each other, the market determined rates of interest versus the state determined rates of interest and the feasible applicability of indices as a measure of market/interest growth.

>>2047727
P
R
A
X
E.
O
L
O
G
Y

File: austrian magic.png (603KB, 712x840px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 712x840px

>>2047664

Kek.

I'd tried Austrian economics once because I was sexually experimenting in Libertarianism, but then the whole thing about you cannot tell if your economic policy is working because you cannot use empirical evidence to prove that Austrian Economics is right sort of made me feel gay so I ended up being a Keynesian like God intended.