Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: 2012 Elections - Page 157







Post#3901 at 09-14-2011 03:47 PM by ASB65 [at Texas joined Mar 2010 #posts 5,892]
---
09-14-2011, 03:47 PM #3901
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
Texas
Posts
5,892

Quote Originally Posted by ziggyX65 View Post
Perry has also rejected the Arizona "solution" for immigration, saying it's "not right for Texas." Whatever that means, but just throwing it out -- Perry's position on immigration is, if nothing else, to the left of Arizona's. Though that's not saying much.
Hey Ziggy...completely off topic here, but we got rain today! I mean real rain! Not just a few drops for 3 minutes. The first real rain we have seen in what seems like almost forever. Did you get any of it?







Post#3902 at 09-14-2011 03:48 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
09-14-2011, 03:48 PM #3902
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by James50 View Post
I apologize for the drive-by shooting. I really do not want to debate you on this subject.

James50
Not a problem. We MMTers can be a sensitive lot - its tough fighting ingrained mythology day in and day out.

I would just ask that you read this one MMT piece as recent example; it is long and some not relevant, but a possible eye-opener.

http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=16113

Peace.
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

Its not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. Its much more akin to printing money. - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#3903 at 09-14-2011 04:10 PM by Galen [at joined Aug 2010 #posts 1,017]
---
09-14-2011, 04:10 PM #3903
Join Date
Aug 2010
Posts
1,017

Quote Originally Posted by The Rani View Post
It's clear to me that there was no "audience cheering" of the idea that we should let people die in hospitals. It was a couple of guys responding facetiously to (and laughing at) a loaded question. What they cheered was the idea of private groups helping the poor, and people helping themselves.

Beware the spin (a general comment, not intended for you personally.)
At last! someone noticed this besides me.
If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.
- Ludwig von Mises

Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.
- Lazarus Long







Post#3904 at 09-14-2011 04:16 PM by summer in the fall [at joined Jul 2011 #posts 1,540]
---
09-14-2011, 04:16 PM #3904
Join Date
Jul 2011
Posts
1,540

Quote Originally Posted by playwrite View Post
Not a problem. We MMTers can be a sensitive lot - its tough fighting ingrained mythology day in and day out.

I would just ask that you read this one MMT piece as recent example; it is long and some not relevant, but a possible eye-opener.

http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=16113

Peace.
Hey playwrite, is MMT what they describe at the end of this cartoon? I admit, that was my first introduction to monetary theory about 5 years ago.

Cheers.
Last edited by summer in the fall; 09-14-2011 at 04:37 PM. Reason: edit link







Post#3905 at 09-14-2011 04:28 PM by ziggyX65 [at Texas Hill Country joined Apr 2010 #posts 2,634]
---
09-14-2011, 04:28 PM #3905
Join Date
Apr 2010
Location
Texas Hill Country
Posts
2,634

Quote Originally Posted by ASB65 View Post
Hey Ziggy...completely off topic here, but we got rain today! I mean real rain! Not just a few drops for 3 minutes. The first real rain we have seen in what seems like almost forever. Did you get any of it?
Well, thanks for not sharing.

All of the state needs rain, but the northern and eastern parts of the state aren't quite as desperate as the rest of us are. Here in the center of the state we're suffering badly. I suspect we're going to hit Stage 5 rationing (the most draconian, basically the "nuclear option") any day now.
Last edited by ziggyX65; 09-14-2011 at 04:31 PM.







Post#3906 at 09-14-2011 06:18 PM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
09-14-2011, 06:18 PM #3906
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by ASB65 View Post
Hey Ziggy...completely off topic here, but we got rain today! I mean real rain! Not just a few drops for 3 minutes. The first real rain we have seen in what seems like almost forever. Did you get any of it?
I'm not Ziggy, nor am I in Texas, but to my great surprise, the back yard rain barrel was full of water today. Part of it went to water the Japanese peach tree.

There's a lovely pink Monrovia rose bush in full bloom on Dufus' grave under the tree now.

http://www.monrovia.com/plant-catalo...k-out-rose.php
http://www.monrovia.com/plant-catalo...k-out-rose.php
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#3907 at 09-14-2011 06:54 PM by ASB65 [at Texas joined Mar 2010 #posts 5,892]
---
09-14-2011, 06:54 PM #3907
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
Texas
Posts
5,892

Quote Originally Posted by The Grey Badger View Post
I'm not Ziggy, nor am I in Texas, but to my great surprise, the back yard rain barrel was full of water today. Part of it went to water the Japanese peach tree.

There's a lovely pink Monrovia rose bush in full bloom on Dufus' grave under the tree now.



http://www.monrovia.com/plant-catalo...k-out-rose.php
http://www.monrovia.com/plant-catalo...k-out-rose.php
I know New Mexico is also having extreme drought conditions too, and glad to hear you got some rain. It's so strange to get so excited about rain. I never would have imagined we would be this way. I honesty think we have only had rain 3 or 4 days since May. And when I say that I'm not talking about it raining all day or even for a few hours. Those were just brief, light showers that only lasted like 10 or 15 minutes. But when it does rain, my kids jump up and down in delight and scream "Mom! Mom! Look! It's raining!!!" You know you're living through extreme and unusual conditions when kids get all excited about a little rain.

I'm glad that the flowers are blooming by your kitty's grave. I'm sure that brings comfort to you.

And Ziggy...I'm sorry to hear you got left out of the rain. I know how tough it is for all you folks down there. You know my thoughts are with you. I hope you get some soon.
Last edited by ASB65; 09-14-2011 at 07:02 PM.







Post#3908 at 09-14-2011 08:13 PM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
09-14-2011, 08:13 PM #3908
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Believe it on not, our YTD rain as of this morning was 1.81" of rain. That's for 9 1/2 months.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#3909 at 09-14-2011 09:56 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-14-2011, 09:56 PM #3909
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

Quote Originally Posted by ziggyX65 View Post
Perry has also rejected the Arizona "solution" for immigration, saying it's "not right for Texas." Whatever that means, but just throwing it out -- Perry's position on immigration is, if nothing else, to the left of Arizona's. Though that's not saying much.
I was very struck by the way Perry seemed almost genuinely offended when, pushed by Bachmann over the vaccine decision, he said, "If you think I can be bought for $5,000!" It turns out that he got $30,000 from Merck, makers of the vaccine, not $5,000. I think he's at least 67% corporate whore and only 33% fundamentalist. (I'm sure you've all heard the old joke, "We've already established your profession, now we're just haggling over the price.) His immigration views are also pro-business. He's a legendary fundraiser, and he has shamelessly used state money to help his friends and donors. Bachmann and/or Palin could make a good deal out of all this.







Post#3910 at 09-14-2011 10:09 PM by The Grey Badger [at Albuquerque, NM joined Sep 2001 #posts 8,876]
---
09-14-2011, 10:09 PM #3910
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Posts
8,876

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
I was very struck by the way Perry seemed almost genuinely offended when, pushed by Bachmann over the vaccine decision, he said, "If you think I can be bought for $5,000!" It turns out that he got $30,000 from Merck, makers of the vaccine, not $5,000. I think he's at least 67% corporate whore and only 33% fundamentalist. (I'm sure you've all heard the old joke, "We've already established your profession, now we're just haggling over the price.) His immigration views are also pro-business. He's a legendary fundraiser, and he has shamelessly used state money to help his friends and donors. Bachmann and/or Palin could make a good deal out of all this.
When he said that about the $5,000, that old joke popped into my head, too.
How to spot a shill, by John Michael Greer: "What you watch for is (a) a brand new commenter who (b) has nothing to say about the topic under discussion but (c) trots out a smoothly written opinion piece that (d) hits all the standard talking points currently being used by a specific political or corporate interest, while (e) avoiding any other points anyone else has made on that subject."

"If the shoe fits..." The Grey Badger.







Post#3911 at 09-14-2011 11:37 PM by ASB65 [at Texas joined Mar 2010 #posts 5,892]
---
09-14-2011, 11:37 PM #3911
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
Texas
Posts
5,892

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
I was very struck by the way Perry seemed almost genuinely offended when, pushed by Bachmann over the vaccine decision, he said, "If you think I can be bought for $5,000!" It turns out that he got $30,000 from Merck, makers of the vaccine, not $5,000. I think he's at least 67% corporate whore and only 33% fundamentalist. (I'm sure you've all heard the old joke, "We've already established your profession, now we're just haggling over the price.) His immigration views are also pro-business. He's a legendary fundraiser, and he has shamelessly used state money to help his friends and donors. Bachmann and/or Palin could make a good deal out of all this.
And according to her handlers, that was exactly what she trying to do. She was trying to make the point that it was all about making money for his donor, but in her usual Bachmann way, she got sidetracked and went off topic in another one of her crazy rants taking the focus off the point she was originally trying to make. Instead of getting her original point across, it became all about the evils of vaccination.







Post#3912 at 09-15-2011 01:36 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
09-15-2011, 01:36 AM #3912
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by James50 View Post
The way presidential politics has worked for some time is that the candidates play to their base during primary season, but then move to the center for a general election. The one guy in my memory who did not do that was Barry Goldwater and he got shellacked in the general. What sold for Perry in Texas will not sell in a general election. Keep in mind he has never lost an election. If he is the nominee, you will see significant changes in his go-about as we near November. He will govern from the right as Obama has governed from the left, but will be pulled inexorably to the center. That's the way things work. There is incredible inertia in our political system. All of the recent presidents have found that out eventually. Bill Clinton was the best at navigating within this political inertia but of course he ended up with the moniker "slick Willie" as a result.

We are not going to abolish Social Security or Medicare although I doubt either will be as generous with the Boomers as they have been with the GIs and Silents. Also, there is not the political will to maintain the federal government at 25% of the economy. Absent a war or other existential crisis, there will continue to be incredible pressures on the budget process until that is returned to its historical 20%.

James50
What is your explanation James for why the government is doing far less with "25%" than it did when it was much smaller decades ago, and when taxes were much higher?

Obama governing from the left? That's a stretch.

I'm still predicting Obama will win. If it looks bad now, the incredibly-fast switches in the electorate these days means that what the polls say now has less than zero significance. 2 months ago, a Democrat takes a solid Republican seat in New York. Now, a Republican takes a solid Democratic seat in New York. Any questions?

What seems clear is that the people are confused and largely ignorant. Anyone who doesn't know that any vote for a Republican these days is a vote to destroy the country, is not paying any attention. So what happens will be the result of the tides in the wind, or the stars. There will be no accounting for it otherwise.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#3913 at 09-15-2011 02:19 AM by annla899 [at joined Sep 2008 #posts 2,860]
---
09-15-2011, 02:19 AM #3913
Join Date
Sep 2008
Posts
2,860

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
What is your explanation James for why the government is doing far less with "25%" than it did when it was much smaller decades ago, and when taxes were much higher?

Obama governing from the left? That's a stretch.

I'm still predicting Obama will win. If it looks bad now, the incredibly-fast switches in the electorate these days means that what the polls say now has less than zero significance. 2 months ago, a Democrat takes a solid Republican seat in New York. Now, a Republican takes a solid Democratic seat in New York. Any questions?

What seems clear is that the people are confused and largely ignorant. Anyone who doesn't know that any vote for a Republican these days is a vote to destroy the country, is not paying any attention. So what happens will be the result of the tides in the wind, or the stars. There will be no accounting for it otherwise.
I can't help but relate the vote in New York to Dan Rostenkowski's demise in Chicago. His district (the 8th district) had been solidly Dem until the scandal in 1994 when he resigned and served time. (For the record, he was my rep at the time). A Republican was voted into office after him--Flanagan. It was clearly a reaction to Rosty's illegal activities. Rosty was old school. Nowadays with the 24/7 news analysis and internet cacophony that Republican win would be seen as some indication of a big old shift. But the Republican in that district was voted out in 2 years and replaced by a Dem. I think the vote in Weiner's former district is more a response to his idiotic sexual behavior than it is to any great shift in voting in that District in the longer run.

PS. The Dem that replaced Flanagan was Blago. Heh. Who was followed by now-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, whose big dream was to be mayor. Now it's Quigley, a Dem.
PPS. I got a big kick out of Rosty. He was powerful as hell. He also battled tax increased to the middle class during the Reagan administration.
Last edited by annla899; 09-15-2011 at 02:33 AM.







Post#3914 at 09-15-2011 05:12 AM by Silversoul [at Portland, OR joined Sep 2011 #posts 82]
---
09-15-2011, 05:12 AM #3914
Join Date
Sep 2011
Location
Portland, OR
Posts
82

Quote Originally Posted by summer in the fall View Post
Hey playwrite, is MMT what they describe at the end of this cartoon? I admit, that was my first introduction to monetary theory about 5 years ago.

Cheers.
As a fellow MMT advocate, I would say that that film is actually a much better introduction to the more mainstream view of money. Here's a rough outline of what's important to understand about MMT:

- Government must spend money before it can be taxed(and therefore spending does not come out of taxes)
- "Borrowing" consists of selling Treasury bonds, which are nothing more than savings accounts at the Fed
- Paying off our national debt is as easy as moving numbers from checking to savings in the same way your bank does with your savings account
- Deficits and debt are not the same (and government can have the former without the latter)
- A government that issues its own currency cannot go broke involuntarily
- Inflation is not a matter of too much money chasing too few goods, but rather of government bidding up the price of the commodities it purchases by buying them at a fixed quantity at the market rate(or a floating rate, if you will)
- This can be remedied by having a "buffer stock" of some commodity that is bought at a fixed price and a floating quantity(in other words, government will buy however much of X commodity that the market will sell them at Y price -- MMTers usually recommend unskilled labor as a buffer stock since it has the additional benefit of creating full employment)

That's about all I can think of for now, but you might want to read Warren Mosler's book, The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy, available for free online.
Last edited by Silversoul; 09-15-2011 at 05:14 AM.







Post#3915 at 09-15-2011 09:17 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-15-2011, 09:17 AM #3915
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

First of all, thank you, Silversoul, for providing at least a basic explanation of what MMT is about, even if you weren't so kind as to tell us what it stands for. I have been trying to follow these discussions without much success for some time. However, based on what I see below, this is a semantic game at best, quackery at worst. A few comments:

As a fellow MMT advocate, I would say that that film is actually a much better introduction to the more mainstream view of money. Here's a rough outline of what's important to understand about MMT:

- Government must spend money before it can be taxed(and therefore spending does not come out of taxes)

I assume the "it" refers to money. The government can issue, and does, tax anticipation notes if it's short of cash. Leaving aside accounting quibbles, all government money spent is either from taxation, borrowing, or sales of assets. It has a balance sheet like any business or household.

- "Borrowing" consists of selling Treasury bonds, which are nothing more than savings accounts at the Fed

That is true, except that it's the US Treasury, not the Fed, which is responsible for paying the interest and principal on the bonds.

- Paying off our national debt is as easy as moving numbers from checking to savings in the same way your bank does with your savings account

That makes no sense at all to me. When we were briefly paying some of it off under Clinton we were retiring more bonds than we were selling. To do that, we needed cash, which consisted of an excess of revenues over expenditures.

- Deficits and debt are not the same (and government can have the former without the latter)

Well, yes, if the government had a huge surplus of cash--which I believe it did around 1890--the federal budget could be in deficit without having a debt. But that's not very relevant to our current situation.

- A government that issues its own currency cannot go broke involuntarily


See Germany, Weimar. If it issued too much value would fall to zero and it would be, in fact, broke.

- Inflation is not a matter of too much money chasing too few goods, but rather of government bidding up the price of the commodities it purchases by buying them at a fixed quantity at the market rate(or a floating rate, if you will)


Inflation can have many causes, of which those are two. It can also occur when wage increases outrun productivity--not a problem we are having at the moment.

- This can be remedied by having a "buffer stock" of some commodity that is bought at a fixed price and a floating quantity(in other words, government will buy however much of X commodity that the market will sell them at Y price -- MMTers usually recommend unskilled labor as a buffer stock since it has the additional benefit of creating full employment)

The latter policy prescription is a good one.

I am nearly finished a big book on Gilded age railroads and other matters. Lots of wild economic ideas were flying around in the 1880s-1890s because economics was a very undeveloped science. By the time I went to college a sensible consensus had been established. Alas, as in every other area of enquiry, Boomers have now torn that consensus down. Thus we'll be hearing lots of wild ideas for a very long time.







Post#3916 at 09-15-2011 10:07 AM by summer in the fall [at joined Jul 2011 #posts 1,540]
---
09-15-2011, 10:07 AM #3916
Join Date
Jul 2011
Posts
1,540

Can't wait 'til playwrite answers my OP and hopefully answers this one as well. Even with my limited knowledge of MMT (Modern Monetary Theory), I can recognize answers and assumptions here that are way off.
Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
First of all, thank you, Silversoul, for providing at least a basic explanation of what MMT is about, even if you weren't so kind as to tell us what it stands for. I have been trying to follow these discussions without much success for some time. However, based on what I see below, this is a semantic game at best, quackery at worst. A few comments:

As a fellow MMT advocate, I would say that that film is actually a much better introduction to the more mainstream view of money. Here's a rough outline of what's important to understand about MMT:

- Government must spend money before it can be taxed(and therefore spending does not come out of taxes)

I assume the "it" refers to money. The government can issue, and does, tax anticipation notes if it's short of cash. Leaving aside accounting quibbles, all government money spent is either from taxation, borrowing, or sales of assets. It has a balance sheet like any business or household.

- "Borrowing" consists of selling Treasury bonds, which are nothing more than savings accounts at the Fed

That is true, except that it's the US Treasury, not the Fed, which is responsible for paying the interest and principal on the bonds.

- Paying off our national debt is as easy as moving numbers from checking to savings in the same way your bank does with your savings account

That makes no sense at all to me. When we were briefly paying some of it off under Clinton we were retiring more bonds than we were selling. To do that, we needed cash, which consisted of an excess of revenues over expenditures.

- Deficits and debt are not the same (and government can have the former without the latter)

Well, yes, if the government had a huge surplus of cash--which I believe it did around 1890--the federal budget could be in deficit without having a debt. But that's not very relevant to our current situation.

- A government that issues its own currency cannot go broke involuntarily


See Germany, Weimar. If it issued too much value would fall to zero and it would be, in fact, broke.

- Inflation is not a matter of too much money chasing too few goods, but rather of government bidding up the price of the commodities it purchases by buying them at a fixed quantity at the market rate(or a floating rate, if you will)


Inflation can have many causes, of which those are two. It can also occur when wage increases outrun productivity--not a problem we are having at the moment.

- This can be remedied by having a "buffer stock" of some commodity that is bought at a fixed price and a floating quantity(in other words, government will buy however much of X commodity that the market will sell them at Y price -- MMTers usually recommend unskilled labor as a buffer stock since it has the additional benefit of creating full employment)

The latter policy prescription is a good one.

I am nearly finished a big book on Gilded age railroads and other matters. Lots of wild economic ideas were flying around in the 1880s-1890s because economics was a very undeveloped science. By the time I went to college a sensible consensus had been established. Alas, as in every other area of enquiry, Boomers have now torn that consensus down. Thus we'll be hearing lots of wild ideas for a very long time.
Last edited by summer in the fall; 09-15-2011 at 10:09 AM. Reason: smiley







Post#3917 at 09-15-2011 11:39 AM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-15-2011, 11:39 AM #3917
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

On another front, here is a fantastic new development in the Bachmann vaccine controversy. I would paraphrase it, but I couldn't possibly do it justice. The Bachmann-Hannity exchange is priceless. We really are fighting over the nature of reality in this election cycle.







Post#3918 at 09-15-2011 01:30 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
09-15-2011, 01:30 PM #3918
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by Silversoul View Post
As a fellow MMT advocate, I would say that that film is actually a much better introduction to the more mainstream view of money. Here's a rough outline of what's important to understand about MMT:

- Government must spend money before it can be taxed(and therefore spending does not come out of taxes)
- "Borrowing" consists of selling Treasury bonds, which are nothing more than savings accounts at the Fed
- Paying off our national debt is as easy as moving numbers from checking to savings in the same way your bank does with your savings account
- Deficits and debt are not the same (and government can have the former without the latter)
- A government that issues its own currency cannot go broke involuntarily
- Inflation is not a matter of too much money chasing too few goods, but rather of government bidding up the price of the commodities it purchases by buying them at a fixed quantity at the market rate(or a floating rate, if you will)
- This can be remedied by having a "buffer stock" of some commodity that is bought at a fixed price and a floating quantity(in other words, government will buy however much of X commodity that the market will sell them at Y price -- MMTers usually recommend unskilled labor as a buffer stock since it has the additional benefit of creating full employment)

That's about all I can think of for now, but you might want to read Warren Mosler's book, The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy, available for free online.
Great to have another MMT voice - as in - "OMG, I am not alone!!!"

From my experience, I would go easy on the last two bullets - neophytes really need to grasp and be comfortable with your first 5 (as well as a couple others) before tackling the latter two.

Again, glad you are here - as in, "OMG, this made my day!"
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

Its not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. Its much more akin to printing money. - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#3919 at 09-15-2011 01:30 PM by KaiserD2 [at David Kaiser '47 joined Jul 2001 #posts 5,220]
---
09-15-2011, 01:30 PM #3919
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
David Kaiser '47
Posts
5,220

And here's more breaking news, which could explain why Palin is not yet in the race. . .







Post#3920 at 09-15-2011 01:48 PM by millennialX [at Gotham City, USA joined Oct 2010 #posts 6,597]
---
09-15-2011, 01:48 PM #3920
Join Date
Oct 2010
Location
Gotham City, USA
Posts
6,597

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
And here's more breaking news, which could explain why Palin is not yet in the race. . .
My friends and I were talking about this. Some even admitted that this made her more "human" to them.
Born in 1981 and INFJ Gen Yer







Post#3921 at 09-15-2011 01:57 PM by wtrg8 [at NoVA joined Dec 2008 #posts 1,262]
---
09-15-2011, 01:57 PM #3921
Join Date
Dec 2008
Location
NoVA
Posts
1,262

I wouldn't take too much stock in these Neo-Con Tools, David. I cannot believe he wanted to take that decision out of the parent's hands in the first place.

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
On another front, here is a fantastic new development in the Bachmann vaccine controversy. I would paraphrase it, but I couldn't possibly do it justice. The Bachmann-Hannity exchange is priceless. We really are fighting over the nature of reality in this election cycle.







Post#3922 at 09-15-2011 02:34 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
09-15-2011, 02:34 PM #3922
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by summer in the fall View Post
Hey playwrite, is MMT what they describe at the end of this cartoon? I admit, that was my first introduction to monetary theory about 5 years ago.

Cheers.
Silversoul has got this right, i.e. that the video is actually based on more conventional (and false) ways of looking at money flows. Let me expand on that.

Here from the video's author are what he believes are the two primary issues that people have taken with his analysis in the video and his response -

http://paulgrignon.netfirms.com/Mone...formation.html

- it is the second one that is of issue to MMT.

Essentially, he sees a fix set of money supply created by "the bankers" who then lend it to those in the economy that want to buy, sell, produce things using the exchange of money as the medium. "The bankers" create just enough money for the principal of the loans made and do not provide money for the interest on these loans. As such the borrowers are constantly scrambling to find the money to pay for interest and slowly but surely "the bankers" wind up with all the assets in the economy.

The problem is that this closed-system approach does not take into account the federal govt that issues new money every day through spending and that spending is not dependent on taxes or borrowing. Before anybody can pay the federal govt taxes or before anyone can lend dollars to the federal govt, the federal govt had to first create those dollars (by spending) - if anyone did create those dollars first, they would likely soon be in jail for at least 20 years.

Moreover, when the federal govt provides interest-bearing securities (T-bills) as a service to the non-federal sectors that want to horde (i.e. save) dollars but with interest (i.e. convert their non-interest bearing govt securities known as dollars to interest-bearing govt securities know as T-bills), the federal govt injects additional money supply into the economy by paying the interest on those T-bills.

The other thing is that while the Federal Reserve, the federal govt's bank, is a profit-making entity, by law, after expensives, they have to turn all of their profit each year back over to the Treasury - who then promptly returns those electrons to the ether from which they came.

The lack of understanding or at least ignoring the unique role of the federal govt as a monetarily-sovereign nation with a monopoly on its currency issuance makes the entire video nothing more than some interesting artwork.

He is right, however, that the private-sector bankers and financial world in general, are in the catbird seat for making money with very little to show for it from a societal viewpoint. Prior to my discovery of the MMT community, I railed on and on about how we need to return banking and the financial sector back to its boring old days before de-regulation set in. Now, after MMT, I firmly believe the entire apparatus, extremely over-compensated middlemen, should be shut down and replaced by a system in which the Nation's citizens do their banking directly with their govt.

Anyway, it was a thought-provoking piece, and I enjoyed it - thanks!
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

Its not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. Its much more akin to printing money. - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#3923 at 09-15-2011 02:34 PM by ASB65 [at Texas joined Mar 2010 #posts 5,892]
---
09-15-2011, 02:34 PM #3923
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
Texas
Posts
5,892

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
And here's more breaking news, which could explain why Palin is not yet in the race. . .
But I would say that the very last paragraph of the article sums it all up.

"Sarah Palin practices politics as lap dance," he writes, "and we're the suckers who pay the price."True enough, perhaps, but like too much of "The Rogue," this is its own sort of come-on: titillating her detractors while allowing her supporters to disregard everything McGinniss has to say.
And that's the way it is with polarizing figures like Palin. Her critics think this will suddenly open the eyes of all her adoring fans about the truth. But her supporters just write it off as nonsense and lies. Unless the writer has all these accusations of her actually doing or saying them documented on video and posted on youtube, in today's world, it's just not legit.

I think Palin isn't going to run because deep down inside, she knows she doesn't have a chance in hell of winning a general election. And she likes the limelight too much. If she were to lose, she just wouldn't get the press and attention she has enjoyed. The losing candidate very rarely does. They just become less and less irrelevant as time goes on.







Post#3924 at 09-15-2011 02:40 PM by playwrite [at NYC joined Jul 2005 #posts 10,443]
---
09-15-2011, 02:40 PM #3924
Join Date
Jul 2005
Location
NYC
Posts
10,443

Quote Originally Posted by KaiserD2 View Post
First of all, thank you, Silversoul, for providing at least a basic explanation of what MMT is about, even if you weren't so kind as to tell us what it stands for. I have been trying to follow these discussions without much success for some time. However, based on what I see below, this is a semantic game at best, quackery at worst. A few comments:

As a fellow MMT advocate, I would say that that film is actually a much better introduction to the more mainstream view of money. Here's a rough outline of what's important to understand about MMT:

- Government must spend money before it can be taxed(and therefore spending does not come out of taxes)

I assume the "it" refers to money. The government can issue, and does, tax anticipation notes if it's short of cash. Leaving aside accounting quibbles, all government money spent is either from taxation, borrowing, or sales of assets. It has a balance sheet like any business or household.

- "Borrowing" consists of selling Treasury bonds, which are nothing more than savings accounts at the Fed

That is true, except that it's the US Treasury, not the Fed, which is responsible for paying the interest and principal on the bonds.

- Paying off our national debt is as easy as moving numbers from checking to savings in the same way your bank does with your savings account

That makes no sense at all to me. When we were briefly paying some of it off under Clinton we were retiring more bonds than we were selling. To do that, we needed cash, which consisted of an excess of revenues over expenditures.

- Deficits and debt are not the same (and government can have the former without the latter)

Well, yes, if the government had a huge surplus of cash--which I believe it did around 1890--the federal budget could be in deficit without having a debt. But that's not very relevant to our current situation.

- A government that issues its own currency cannot go broke involuntarily


See Germany, Weimar. If it issued too much value would fall to zero and it would be, in fact, broke.

- Inflation is not a matter of too much money chasing too few goods, but rather of government bidding up the price of the commodities it purchases by buying them at a fixed quantity at the market rate(or a floating rate, if you will)


Inflation can have many causes, of which those are two. It can also occur when wage increases outrun productivity--not a problem we are having at the moment.

- This can be remedied by having a "buffer stock" of some commodity that is bought at a fixed price and a floating quantity(in other words, government will buy however much of X commodity that the market will sell them at Y price -- MMTers usually recommend unskilled labor as a buffer stock since it has the additional benefit of creating full employment)

The latter policy prescription is a good one.

I am nearly finished a big book on Gilded age railroads and other matters. Lots of wild economic ideas were flying around in the 1880s-1890s because economics was a very undeveloped science. By the time I went to college a sensible consensus had been established. Alas, as in every other area of enquiry, Boomers have now torn that consensus down. Thus we'll be hearing lots of wild ideas for a very long time.
This is good stuff. However, I think it would be 'cleaner' on the forum to take this over to the "Economy" thread. I'll do that and provide a link here once I do.

as promised, here's the link to the other thread -

http://www.fourthturning.com/forum/s...643#post392643

I will tell you that "MMT" stands for "Modern Monetary Theory" derived from earlier economic thought know as Chartalism.
Last edited by playwrite; 09-15-2011 at 03:42 PM.
"The Devil enters the prompter's box and the play is ready to start" - R. Service

Its not tax money. The banks have accounts with the Fed so, to lend to a bank, we simply use the computer to mark up the size of the account that they have with the Fed. Its much more akin to printing money. - B.Bernanke


"Keep your filthy hands off my guns while I decide what you can & can't do with your uterus" - Sarah Silverman

If you meet a magic pony on the road, kill it. - Playwrite







Post#3925 at 09-15-2011 02:48 PM by Weave [at joined Feb 2010 #posts 909]
---
09-15-2011, 02:48 PM #3925
Join Date
Feb 2010
Posts
909

Quote Originally Posted by ASB65 View Post
But I would say that the very last paragraph of the article sums it all up.



And that's the way it is with polarizing figures like Palin. Her critics think this will suddenly open the eyes of all her adoring fans about the truth. But her supporters just write it off as nonsense and lies. Unless the writer has all these accusations of her actually doing or saying them documented on video and posted on youtube, in today's world, it's just not legit.

I think Palin isn't going to run because deep down inside, she knows she doesn't have a chance in hell of winning a general election. And she likes the limelight too much. If she were to lose, she just wouldn't get the press and attention she has enjoyed. The losing candidate very rarely does. They just become less and less irrelevant as time goes on.
Palin most likely will not run but this book has no bearing on her decision. Books such as these, without good source material rarely get taken seriously whether from the left or the right.
-----------------------------------------