These guys are nauseating. I want to puke. They were wrong in the past and wrong now, but they still haul them out there on these panels.
The host, Andy Serwer, a complete idiot, but what a career this guy has put together: Time Inc., now big shot at Yahoo, yet every other word out of his mouth, "um, um, um..."
The Argentina finance minister, a total neoliberal puppet, championing the same, old, destructive, usurping, neoliberal bullshit...deregulation, privatization, yada, yada and of course talking about the "failed policies of the past" (yes, because their asshole leaders never went full ahead with those policies. They always played ball with Wall Street.)
Watch it and puke.
23 comments:
"A bunch of self-important, narcissistic know-nothings, adored by their fellow elites, loftily describing how it's important to keep everyone else down"
hmmm ... couldn't have put it better myself, Mike
thanks for stating the truth bluntly
I ran out of barf months ago.
bullish pitchforks...
There's a need for projectile vomit, or at least throw some water on the blowhards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aopdD9Cu-So
I particularly admire Kenneth Rogoff, the follow who equates household debts with national debts, i.e. who doesn't get the difference between micro and macro.
who doesn't get the difference between micro and macro
Conventional economics assumes that macro is scaled up micro.
They talk about countries as if they are machines. They say that poverty rates are too high and then talk about implementing more neoliberal policies to reduce this. Its makes them sound like every care, but they don't care at all about what goes on at the bottom end of society which is a hot house of stress and misery. Lifting people out of poverty for then means people working two or three jobs doing 60 hours a week or more just to get by because of the rock bottom wages they get.
They say debt every now and again becomes a problem in society where people become unable to service their loans. It wasn't that debts were to high, it's just the public's ability to service those debts that's a problem.
Every now and again they say that debts become a problem and there is no way of predicting when this is going to happen. They say this problem has gone on for centuries and all societies have had problems with it. But they didn't mention how the past they had debt jubilees where people's debts were wiped clean. So no problem. But these economists are just lackeys for the bankers, aka the one percent, aka the ruling class, aka the aristocracy, aka the ruling elite as the libertarians like to call them.
Anyway, what about a Basic Income and then we will work only if we want to work. Fuck the conservatives - and the libertarians!
"they didn't mention how the past they had debt jubilees where people's debts were wiped clean."
Thats part of the ancient "borrow > default > forgive" textbook Old Testament 101 paradigm... New Testament (grace) is "issue > redeem" which Paul taught and Christendumb and their Israelite sidekicks cannot understand ...
look at our current numismatic system (now that we are out from under the metals) that way as all state currency issuance, whether a direct withdrawal from the Treasury account or an advance of state currency via a loan from a regulated fiscal agent of the Treasury as "issuance" and any transfers made to the Treasury or its fiscal agents whether as taxes to the Treasury directly or the payment of a loan to a fiscal agent as a "redemption"...
that is the way our current numismatic system is operating since we got out from under the metals again whether the morons can understand this or not... and they manifestly cannot...
Those "jubilees" just make it roll right back over into "borrow > default > forgive" again and again and are of no help...
'Those "jubilees" just make it roll right back over into "borrow > default > forgive" again and again and are of no help...'
Interesting post, Matt. You're probably right. There must be a better way.
What's next, after endorsement of periodic, blanket Debt Jubilees?
Well, asynchronous, interleaved writing off of insignificant debt claims, as soon as they pale in comparison to new opportunities requiring coordination on a larger scale?
That's basically a restatement of the theory of evolution. New options always arrive. To capitalize [ :) ] on them, former competitors routinely band together to co-generate shared benefits.
In market terms, we all accrue countless debits & credits on a daily basis, from something as little as holding a door open for the next person, to taking the cost of waiting our turn at stop lights ... and on to keeping lottery winnings. The vast majority of those little debts are written off as soon as they're generated. Why? Because they're already negligible compared to the magnitude of BIGGER options.
We'll never quit arguing over current debts to one another, until we endorse going after insanely great achievements that make it easy for us to forgive current interdependencies. After all, what's a "debt" to a member of a social species? An interdependency, that's what.
How do we get people to explore their emerging options? Provision them well enough to unleash their imaginations, that's how. With a bit more imagination, it's never difficult for people to agree on exploring even bigger/better options.
Why? Because humans are always more valuable than any other denomination of value, whether commodity or leverage.
And the most valuable humans are those with their full range of initiative unleashed .. which never occurs by coercion alone.
One of the biggest factors in the success of the capitalist model is bankruptcy (and strategic default). It's the reset button that keeps the system churning along.
Right. Every move to make bankruptcy only for elites, and not for plebes (e.g., student loans) is another step in aggregate self-assisted-suicide. ( Surely that discrepancy is ripe for a Constitutional Challenge?)
Funny that assisted suicide is illegal for individuals assisting other individuals, but not if they're assisting aggregate suicide. :(
Go figure.
Roger all you guys are evo-atheists you dont understand the religious biases these people are operating under...
Everything has to be "borrowed" under terms which open the opportunity for "default" and then "forgiveness" and then its right back to more "borrowing"... these people are operating under a strong OT religious bias...
"In market terms, we all accrue countless debits & credits on a daily basis, from something as little as holding a door open"
I hold doors open and NEVER expect anything in return... this is called "grace" or "unmerited favor"... its the EXACT OPPOSITE of the OT bias that TPTB currently are operating under...
Some people call it "finance capital" (borrowed) and some people just call it "capital" (issued)...
Look at these people attack Trump who wont take their munnie but rather just says he'll do it because he wants to and doesnt expect anything for it... they CANT STAND THIS and want him GONE....
We have to try to develop an empirical theory for our current system operations to demonstrate our competency (NO ONE is doing this currently...) and see if that attracts enough eyeballs to foment a widespread change in the popular paradigm ... all of this rationalism isnt working at all... it becomes a religious/philosophical argument as there is no empiricism ... we have not tried true science (empiricism) yet imo...
What empiricism do you need beyond following transactions and balance sheets? There is an anthropological angle to it I guess, it has been studied how different societies operate, but there is no describing 'law of nature', there is no law of nature to discover here. Is a political choice of how you want to structure your society credit relationships, there are a handful of ways you can do it and most can be summarized to a few (like those you say), in the end is about social relationships and structures. there is no "right" way to do it, some ways favour more ones than others.
If you view the world as a zero-sum scenario, winner-takes-all, which most of that people in Davos does the current model works fine (until it stops working).
The way is going soon we will have "debtor's prisons" again and everyone being a slave. This is the funny thing, they are not "borrow > forgive", they are "borrow > be a slave to pay back". At this rate slavery like during the Romans will be back and everyone will be enslaving themselves to corporations to "pay back debts" which are unpayable anyway (because insufficient nominal growth which in't coming back, for now or as ong as current policies are extended).
"soon we will have "debtor's prisons" again " that is for those who "default"... the terms of the default require a prison term in order to move forward to "foregiveness"... then the person receives absolution and the person is let out of jail and they can borrow again...
"What empiricism do you need beyond following transactions and balance sheets?"
Those are just observations...
You have to make quantified predictive statements in empiricism...
We just got blasted with snow here in the US mid-Atlantic, the forecast was for 20" and we got 24".... even though it wasnt exact we cant say "you were wrong!!!!!" to the weather forecast people... it is "close enough" to obtain respect and credibility...
We have no credibility at present....
What sort of empirical research do you want to do, I probably don't understand what the research subject is. It's true we speak broadly, and we need operational definitions and hypothesis, narrowing down the subject.
An study on the cognitive framing of the understanding of 'debt' and credit relationships? How these are institutionalized and operate? predictions on behavioural patterns derived from models based on that data? The subject is wide.
We need empirical data on the distribution of beliefs regarding this in the population? How to change that? If it's correct or not (which produces better outcomes and improves the general well-being)? What exactly are we trying to find out?
But don't think this is going to change much no matter how much empirical backing you got behind you: the current set of dominant ideas have zero proof or predictive power of anything, is all fantasy theories, and anyway there they are. Rational analysis doesn't drive politics (and policies), it's all about memes.
At this point is more about generating powerful memes and rhetorics to battle the 'other side' (the debtor prison side?). There is no 'right' or 'wrong', is about how we decide society to structure. This is a core issue.
listening to the neo-liberal new Argentine finance minister...it's a good thing he has moved the currency into a free-floating currency unlike,unlike kirchener who had it basicly fixed.
I wonder what regulations he has removed that he felt were impeding the argentine economy from being being fully utilised as he said
I you say here:
": the current set of dominant ideas have zero proof or predictive power of anything, is all fantasy theories, and anyway there they are."
Yes this is true but why? Must there be an acceptable alternative theory to disprove the false ones? I think so... and we dont have one.... that is why we get nowhere... if we had one I think we would get somewhere with it... just saying "govt is not out of money!" yes it is true but it falls waaaaaay short of a qualified technical theory its more just a rationalist statement...
You have to go back and look at how "flat earth" was defeated or "leeches to get out the bad blood", etc... stuff like that where eventually, empiricsim won out over rationalism....
imo empiricism can overcome falsehoods and rationalism and all this idiot moron religiosity.... BUT a comprehensive, technically competent body of empirical theory STILL has to be developed to overcome it.... and I dont see it being done...
Ok but how exactly you substantiate a self-evident truth? "Government cannot run out of money because money is an artificial construct that we can 'manufacture'". The we go in circles until someone says "Zimbabwe!" which is the Godwin's law equivalent of economics discussion.
I think the crux of the question is constructing a convincing "theory of inflation" that can produce predictions, this would ultimately end the discussion about.
However notice that this shit has been going on since Ricardo and even during Keynes it always has been treated in the abstract. The dominant theory is monetarism but this has been already falsified by operational REALITY, and no one fucking cares, they keep repeating it.
You would think that's enough evidence to dish the the theory but it doesn't happen, they still are there. In science even if you don't have an explanation for a phenomenon, if data doesn't support a false theory, the wrong theory is dished out.
Theory of inflation?
Whatever definition of inflation you are using, it still doesn't matter.
All definitions of inflation remain incidental artifacts of an out-of-paradigm perspective.
What are we worried about, CURRENT FIAT or FUTURE REAL OPTIONS?
Don't conflate the two. Inflation is a simple, mathematical coincidence thrown off in the course of real growth.
http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2013/12/conflating-current-fiat-with-future.html
Inflation? Ask me if eukaryotes, between the transition from fungi to massively-multicellular metazoans, ever worried about "inflation" of the # of ATP molecules used per cellular/organ/physiological or cultural capability gained.
Inflation? That's like worrying about the number of data points discussed by workers building Stonehenge vs Mohenjo-daro vs the US National Highway System. It's not something that ever gets in the way of evolving systems. Inflation is just something that momentarily distracts the small minds still learning their place in big things.
Good luck bating the "Zimbabwe" boogeyman w/o an explanation on how/when inflation happens. When you reach the Godwin's law equivalent of economics discussion the monetarists will claim victory and keep dictating policy.
Just ask the Zimbabwe boogeypeople:
1) to DEFINE inflation;
2) to state what "inflation" means to a growing aggregate
Post a Comment