Let’s just put it out there: There is an optimum range for economic dynamism, diversity and complexity determined by rules. If our economic rule-sets are too complicated and cumbersome, we won’t get flourishing. There will be distortions and perversions at best. If our economic rulesets are underdeveloped or ambiguous, economic actors will not be able to regularize their behavior so as to lower transaction costs and focus on innovation. As with the laws of nature, there is a sweet spot in the set of all possible rulesets, which gives rise to maximum complexity and diversity. If we can agree that a complex, diverse economy is likely to result in concomitant opportunity and prosperity, then maybe we should turn our attention to those rules in the sweet spot that yield complexity and diversity.
One commenter thinks I may be pushing the analogy. You be the judge.
Seems to me that economic growth means that which is created and brought to market that has not existed before, a positive change created by innovators not afraid to make waves and wakes, as cited in Save Pebble Droppers & Prosperity on Amazon.com and claysamerica.com
Posted by: clay barham | February 02, 2010 at 10:12 AM