Crime Against Humanity: Pensée Unique in Economics, 35

Back to their purpose of demonstrating true the foundation of their mainstream schools of Pensée Unique in Economics, that the “velocity” with which money changes hands is constant, and that therefore the ratio of Gross Domestic Product to the money supply is also constant, the unresolved issue of what money is resulted in a license for economists to choose the definition of money supply that best suited such purpose of theirs: if choosing one definition did not produce a velocity constant enough, well, choose another. As they say, try again, you’ll be luckier next time…
“Textbooks and researchers have been unwilling to tie themselves down to any one measure of the money supply, partly because there is such a large variety to pick and choose from.” Points out Werner.

But Werner points out something else, too: “This in itself, however, should make us suspicious: how could confidence in economics and its link to reality be high, if what surely must be one of the most important variables in economics – the amount of money circulating in the economy – cannot be measured or defined accurately?”

The unmasking of the Pensée Unique in Economics begins by the demolition of its foundation: that the ratio of Gross Domestic Product to the money supply is constant. And it starts from there not by chance, and in the most overwhelming way.
Not by chance because, not surprisingly, the hidden real purpose of the Pensée Unique is directly connected to its foundation.
In the most overwhelming way because that foundation proves false with any definition of money supply.

Data in hand, Werner plots the graphs of the ratio of Gross Domestic Product to ALL the measures of money, and finds that “velocity” is higly variable over time. So inescapable is this fact that the aforementioned statement of the then Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in front of the House Budget Committee in 2001 is a grudging admission of it.