An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Problem with all this inequality talk is that no one seems to have any answer which doesn't seem to involve taking rich folks money and "giving" it to the poor folks. No one supports taking from a person who earned it and giving to a "whiner".
Until the terms of the debate are changed we will stick right where we are politically.
As long as taxation is viewed by most people as "taking" by the govt, it will never get broad support for increases (not that I support increases per se)
As long as transfers are looked at as giving to the undeserving, and as adding to an unsustainable deficit, we will not get broad support for those.
As long as SS is seen as something which we must first pay into we'll never get support for policies proposed here.
As long as shareholder value is placed above all we will never see support for increasing wages since that increases costs and decreases profits.
As long as private sector work is the only work that counts we will not see support for a JG
Inequality is baked into the rules of the game. Its a winner take all game and every other game is derided as "communism" so I am not optimistic.
There is only enough $NFAs issued for that 'redistribution' to work for about 4 months and then it all would have to be 'redistributed' all over again... and then again... and then again..... and then again....
That's my point about having to replace neoliberalism as TINA. As long as people buy into the TINA BS, there will be no significant lasting change to the current system.
However, people also don't think that the system is either just or serving them.
What is needed is a comprehensive solution based on a moral argument and showing what is possible within existing policy space. A piecemeal approach will fail for reasons like the ones cited.
4 comments:
Problem with all this inequality talk is that no one seems to have any answer which doesn't seem to involve taking rich folks money and "giving" it to the poor folks. No one supports taking from a person who earned it and giving to a "whiner".
Until the terms of the debate are changed we will stick right where we are politically.
As long as taxation is viewed by most people as "taking" by the govt, it will never get broad support for increases (not that I support increases per se)
As long as transfers are looked at as giving to the undeserving, and as adding to an unsustainable deficit, we will not get broad support for those.
As long as SS is seen as something which we must first pay into we'll never get support for policies proposed here.
As long as shareholder value is placed above all we will never see support for increasing wages since that increases costs and decreases profits.
As long as private sector work is the only work that counts we will not see support for a JG
Inequality is baked into the rules of the game. Its a winner take all game and every other game is derided as "communism" so I am not optimistic.
Greg,
There is only enough $NFAs issued for that 'redistribution' to work for about 4 months and then it all would have to be 'redistributed' all over again... and then again... and then again..... and then again....
Starting to "feel the flow"?
;) rsp,
@ Greg
That's my point about having to replace neoliberalism as TINA. As long as people buy into the TINA BS, there will be no significant lasting change to the current system.
However, people also don't think that the system is either just or serving them.
What is needed is a comprehensive solution based on a moral argument and showing what is possible within existing policy space. A piecemeal approach will fail for reasons like the ones cited.
Agreed Tom, neoliberalism is THE scourge.
Matt
Sorry, not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying our annual deficit is currently only about a third of where it needs to be?
Post a Comment