> FWIW, I don’t think Marx’s formulation of the category of “fictitious”
> capital has proven very helpful, but that’s a whole other argument.
I actually think it's useful and interesting as long as it's used in a technical sense - paper claims to income streams. The problem is when you read a value judgement into it, or read 'fictitious' as 'fake' or 'worthless'.
I like your critique of Hudson, by the way. He was in Sydney a few months ago and had a public meeting with hundreds of people, which I was surprised by. Also he spent a day at the central bank. Where is this guy coming from?
Mike Beggs