Well this is the issue and the obstacle for this kind of thing. I need the government to set the regulations to be able to use the product then the product would take the form of a process or formula, which you can patent, or alternatively a software package that makes the product viable in application. This is the area governments have power, the authorisation, approval, regulation, legal rights and operational allowance. If I give the government a big cut and the new work gets approval the formula or software gets patented and then the providers of the product can use it for a share of the profits. Then it can go international, getting commissions from all of the providers of the product around the world. I call this technique Internationally Commercialised Innovation or ICI. I reckon I can give the world a whole new economic model saving and making billions every year. I also reckon I can get an additional two to four percent of extra economic growth per year out of it, which I can then use to reduce the government debt as a percentage of GDP. I estimate that with an economic growth rate of 4% per year I can get the debt to fall to 60 % of GDP within 13 - 14 years in the UK, no debt has to be repaid the GDP just outgrows it. If I can keep interest rates low I can stop the government debt from rising during that time.
You have an unfortunate propensity to make pompous ridiculous grandiose statements - and this really turns people off to the point where no one is going to take you seriously. In fact, they shouldn’t.
I don't understand why you feel that is so unlikely when using pension economic control in the United Kingdom has been so effective over the last decade. There is massive potential for economic growth through pension economic control and its use in the United Kingdom has led to the economic targets being achieved over the last decade, with straight line results. All I would have to do is get another 2% additional economic growth from Pension Fund Easing and then I can get the 4% annual economic rate when it is added to the existing 2% economic growth rate. I also don't understand why you say that I make grandiose statements when everything I state is backed up by evidence of success. Since using my work over the last decade in the United Kingdom economic growth has been sustained, inflation has been controlled, interest rates have been kept low which has reduced the cost of government debt repayments and unemployment has fallen sharply. I feel it is more other people's denial of the success of pension economic control and pension reform to achieve economic targets. It is more you living in denial.
Grandiosity is the primary feature of Narcissistic Personality Disorder. And yes, I am in complete denial of your claims in terms of your own veracity as it relates to influencing policy or events.
I have produced a body of economic work, that I have evidence of production and legal ownership of, that has been used by the British government over the last decade. I have written acknowledgement of thanks and a statement of intention to use the work from the Finance Minister at the time. I have acknowledgement of use from all of the governmental units and departments involved in applying the work. I have permission from the government, parliament and the politicians involved to publish the work I have produced globally. The work has been applied, the evidence is in the technical pages at the HMRC and in the policies recommended in my work and then used by the government. Since using alterations in pension saving and using my pension reforms inflation and economic growth have reached their targets, which is unprecedented. Interest rates have remained low and at the same rate for seven years, providing evidence pension saving alterations and pension reform is the active mechanism in economic control. Many Treasury cost efficiencies have been achieved since the pension reforms were introduced. This is the reality of what Morganist Economic has achieved. I would wonder why previous economic control was so difficult with hyper inflation and double figure interest rates, since pension economic control was used in the United Kingdom these problems have disappeared.
When there is written evidence and proof of legal ownership I can't see how you can question it is my work. When there is empirical evidence of continual economic target hitting especially when the other active mechanisms used to achieve the economic targets are unmoving it is apparent pension economic control is effective. I have both proof of ownership of the work and that it has been effective in application.
I have just put up some old letters I sent to politicians in the United Kingdom that provide specific instructions on what poses a threat to the economy and what actions need to be taken to avoid the threats. The details of specific pension regulations are stated along with recommendations of actions to close threats, these alterations have subsequently happened. I have letters of response from politicians thanking me for the work and stating their intention to use it. The Registered Pension Schemes Manual is now the Pension Tax Manual, which contains many of my regulation changes. I refer to a poster in one of my letters, which details the advantages of using pension economic control instead of interest rate economic control. The interest rate was at a constant rate for seven years of the last decade. Pension saving allowances were altered every year throughout the last decade. All of the economic targets including inflation and economic growth were achieved over that period and unemployment fell drastically when pension pumping was used. I have linked to the letters and the poster. http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/10/influential-letter-submitted-by.html http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/01/pension-saving-economic-control-is.html?q=poster This poster has been massively influential, when I produced it I had many printed and then sent it to all of the leading politicians in the United Kingdom. Since then the pension system has been massively reformed and pension economic control is a reality in the United Kingdom. I have published many articles in addition to the letters and I have book portfolio too.
Yeah, I read your links and it’s fine for self published Amazon booklets and blogs but the first legit economist that vets your work is going to be underwhelmed and dismissive. I studied some economics in graduate school at The University of Chicago and I guess I’m used to seeing more rigorously constructed and robust work more along the lines of the scientific method with proofs. Even the socioeconomics papers are much more rigorous than your stuff. Since you’re trying to make inroads with decision makers and policy influencers maybe you should submit your work for peer review and publication in the Oxford Economic Journal and LSE’s Economica.
What part of giving specific instructions of how to alter the pension regulations and how to alter pension saving allowances can you not see being provided and then used. This is work that has been used, there is evidence it has been used, the regulations have been changed following my instructions. This is economics in practical application, what you are seeing as economics is papers or formulas that may not even be used in practice. Changing pension regulations and the pension saving rates is the active tool that has been used in the United Kingdom over the last decade. The evidence is in the updates to the regulations and the changes in the pension saving allowances and also in the changes in pension funds investments that have been made. I have provided clear evidence of work that has been acknowledged by the government, then used successfully in application. The work you are talking about in regards to papers at which ever university would have to be applied in practice to be of use. My work has been applied in practice the evidence is in writing and has copyright written all over it. Then there is the approval of the government, parliament and the politicians involved in the use of the work that states the work originated from me and that they intended to use it which they subsequently did. I have provided you with the evidence of pension reforms I submitted and evidence politicians and the government have used and approved it. This is what matters and it has been accomplished. You are acting as if the government has not used the work, but it has and I have evidence of it. The objective has been accomplished, the United Kingdom uses pension saving and pension reform as an economic control policy and it works. I am not sure if you have read my books, because they are fairly detailed and full of required approval declarations. The book Modern Applied Macroeconomics is not short it is 142 A4 pages long and provides very specific workings of the macroeconomic practice it recommends. Are you saying you have read all of my books? Anyway my work has been used in the United Kingdom and has been successful in its application.