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.
I'm just about the only liberal/progressive/leftie/social democrat, call it what you will, I know who favours pulling out of the EU. Neil does, but I don't "know" him.
Those in favour of the EU are at best incoherent; usually, they're just moronic: "I feel European", "The EU has prevented war", "The EU gives us rights", etc.
John, I'm spaniard and I also feel European, but I'm not blinded by absurd impractical internationalism "uber alles" of the European left (ie. Yanis Varofaukis) and their doomsday preaching ("it will be with the EU, or it won't be").
As much I would like to have a United States of Europe, it's not going to happen with the current stupid institutions and framework in place, and dreaming (again like YV) is not going to make it real. There is no 'incremental approach' to making the EU more democratic, it's not going to work as it's a co-opted institution beyond any sort of democratic control that can make it change from within.
The EU must be brought down before we could even start to dream to make a real political union and not this corporate lobbying travesty.
Ignacio, I say what I say as an internationalist, in the best sense of the term. I can't see any principled reason against an international federation of nations. Why stop at Europe? In practice, so much would have to change, the human race may not be around long enough.
In any case, I don't really know what it means to be European. I guess I'm just too provincially English and too internationalist for this feeling of "being European" to mean anything. Personally, I'd rather live in any number of Asian, North American or South American countries before I'd choose to live in some European countries. Some European countries just leave you cold. I do love Spain, though!
I have no wish to see any more European countries destroyed by this neoliberal virus. Greece, Cyprus, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Ireland, etc are quite enough. The institutions cannot be changed. Time to bring the temple down.
It is heartening to see such good sense on this issue in the comments section. I hope left-wing/labour/social democratic people are waking up.
If you study the issues carefully, the EU and -- above all -- the Eurozone are outrageous, catastrophic neoliberal disasters. They have caused tremendous suffering. The EU is a corporate tyranny of unelected incompetent neoliberal buffoons. They are basically taking a wrecking ball to Europe.
Andy, my bad! Confederation, yes. The human race won't be around long enough (or falls for nationalist gibberish) to create something as progressive as a federation of nations in solidarity with each other, in the same way that, say, California subsidises Arkansas. Since most people can't put away their conception of themselves as anything other that as belonging to a nation-state, the best we can hope for is confederation.
Anything, however, is better than the EU. Going back to nation-states would be a huge leap forward. I really thought that the core states would be pragmatic with respect to the so-called periphery. It's real sadism. They'd rather see whole nations implode and fascist parties become popular than give an inch. This sadism, however, has lurched into sadomasochism.
LK, our team will vote to remain in the EU. The violence meted out to the periphery means nothing to them. Solidarity and internationalism are mere words to this collection of deaf, dumb and blind.
Mike, you're wrong. We won't abandon the EU, and we'll also continue with out own neoliberal wrecking ball policies. A double whammy if there ever was one.
Andy, quite right about the delusion. If you caught Newsnight the other night, Ken Clarke was forthright: even if we vote to leave, we then have to go through the farce of negotiating which parts of the EU will stay in place. I suspect most of it will stay in place, no matter what.
The referendum has become a controlled way of letting off steam. At least a vote to leave is something to build on. A vote to stay in is condemning the UK and the other countries in the EU to further neoliberal madness. And we'll be doing it with our eyes closed for many decades to come because a vote to stay in would effectively kill off the issue for a long time to come.
For me John it's about the process how are you going to get from A to B? Shall start from my own party (Green) official line is in but reformed (so do the Tories, Labour etc want in but reform). Can see our policy online if you are interested. So we want this and that...Great how are we going to make that process happen? *tumbleweed*
OK for out here is LK'S proposals as an out. "(1) to protect the UK’s economic and political sovereignty;
(2) to protect its democracy;
(3) to protect its welfare state and social services;
(4) to have some hope for a Post Keynesian-style or MMT-style economic policy in the future;
(5) to take control of its borders and immigration policy, because the EU open borders policy is disastrous – disastrous for the welfare state, the working class, the real wage, the employment prospects of the British people and its very social cohesion."
Agree totally, great so right where is the process to get from where we are now to there? *tumbleweed* again as no actual tactic to get rid of the Neoliberals who are busy cutting MP'S (but making more Lords).
ISTM There are lots of proposals where we *want* to be but no actual process to get there. Lots of destinations but the trains ain't running.
I think the Eurosystem could work you just cant allow foreign claims to accrue, ie a form of 'capital controls' or wtf ... this is getting to Ramanan's point...
Greece already had it they had a 'common currency' with the drachma system but you can see here they wouldn't allow foreign claims to accrue between the cities:
"....with a view, however, to expeditions and journeys to other lands..the state must also possess a common Hellenic currency....If a private person is ever obliged to go abroad, let him have the consent of the magistrates and go;.... and if when he returns he has any foreign money remaining, let him give the surplus back to the treasury, and receive a corresponding sum in the local currency." Plato "Laws" c. 360 BC
that would work and there needn't be any 'fiscal union' to complicate it and the nations could have local democracy and do what they needed to do fiscally according to the local democratic outcomes ... you fix the exchange rate and let favor between the nations float... this would at least be TECHNICALLY possible to work... what Eurozone has now cant work there are impossible terms subject to default...
"The EU is a corporate tyranny of unelected incompetent neoliberal buffoons. "
Yes it is. It is the ultimately technocracy. But they have excellent PR.
And ultimately that is all that matters in a world where persuasion rules.
If you look at the so called 'left' economists they all despise democracy and want to control it - hence why they pitch for helicopter money from central banks, not more spending from government. The only government they want to see is one that has the power of a parish council or school governing body. In other words nothing.
With all these deluded servants of corporatism, there is only one question for the rest of us.
"Ken Clarke was forthright: even if we vote to leave, we then have to go through the farce of negotiating which parts of the EU will stay in place. '
Unfortunately that's a bit of a lie.
The default position is that *all* of it stays in place - since you just grandfather the current setup to start with.
You then decide which bits you derogate from, and you do that slowly over time. This is not a tearing up of the rule book. This is a decision that the rule book from henceforth will be decided in Westminster not Brussels.
And it is a key point to get across. The process of Britain choosing its own direction will be precisely the same process as when Ireland chose its own direction and if Scotland chose its own direction. It would be an Iceberg moving slowly away from an ice sheet.
You'll note the framing from the Europhiles. That as soon as the vote comes in there will be an instant destruction of everything. That is completely false. There will be a lot of prior preparation and talking to people from Europe and across the World before the UK decides to make the break. It is very important to get across that the process in Article 50 is activated *at the behest* of the member nation. So it might be five years before that happens. It might be ten. Or it might all get sorted in a year.
If you get all your ducks in a row politically then the process of separation would be relatively painless - particularly as once the vote comes in and a declaration that the UK is seeking a free trade agreement along the lines of EFTA then entities within the economies will start to shift to the new reality ahead of time.
Don't fall for the framing of the europhiles. They are playing the "let's set some arbitrary deadline" game. Obviously they've been watching too much reality TV.
No country is going to abandon the EU right now, things have to get abysmally worse for that to happen, we are not close to that point yet. But real problems like massive immigration waves will make the collapse of the union eventually happen. If you think any country is going to abandon the EU right now you are incredible out of touch with European reality and don't know what you are talking about.
The group-think and PR machine is at continental level, anyone suggesting a country should abandon the EU is regarded as a crackpot, a weirdo or a member of the far-right (a badge very few people carry with honour in Europe) immediately over here. And don't forget that we don't live in fantasy-MMT world, in our current reality people thinks that governments do run out of money, so in that context they don't see as being out of the EU. Even in the UK the anti-EU group is a minority, and many of those who are debating if they should vote yes what want is a 'better bargain'.
A lot of people perceives that the EU is a protection against their own out-of-control politicians, they praise and love central-bankism and neoliberal dictatorship from Brussels. No political order comes to existence w/o population collaboration, none ever, again as in the case of neoliberal mainstream political parties, there is a proportion of the population which wield most political power and are enablers of the current regime (probably around ~35%-25% of the population).
"Agree totally, great so right where is the process to get from where we are now to there?"
The process is first to recover the parliament and make it sovereign. There is little point standing for election to a School Governing council and expecting to fix unemployment from that position.
So the trick is to put the power in place. And then let the Tories go nuts. Because, without putting too fine a point on it, real change only happens at pinch points. So you need to bring one about.
If the left doesn't do it, then the level of immigration will get to a point where a Trump arises to deal with it.
The one thing Blair had going for him is that he realised that the ERM disaster, the subsequent recession and the fact that Ken Clarke was nicely setting things up on a plate gave him a huge opportunity. All he had to do was put the righteous left in their box.
Spot on.The Mania and dogma is continent wide.The pro-EU opinion is orthodoxy.Despite the fact that the EU pushes privatisation, subsidises wealth landowners,prohibits government fiscal expansion (most notably in the Euro-zone) and promotes the interests of Bankers.
I also feel actively European,we have shared cultural roots and values and a Civilisation which set us apart from Turkey,ME and North Africa.
But what the EU did too Greece is sickening and enraging.Typical of a neo-liberal elitist I recall Christine lagarde saying she was more concerned about poverty in the third world than in Greece.the Depression imposed on Greece gave lie to the myth that EU has anything to do with European solidarity.
It seems that most people in the EU think that the present system is superior to the previous one, warts and all, and they are reluctant to return to another system that they think worked worse that the present one.
It's important to remember that countries like Greece and Spain were military dictatorships within living memory. That informs opinion.
I was watching a chat between Galloway and Farage and they made the important point that in continental Europe it is the young that are not that keen on the EU, whereas in the UK it is the young that are largely Europhile.
That in it self shows the disparate views across the continent based upon differing histories and differing presents. It's not really feasible to shoehorn all that into a single superstructure.
It's very likely that the UK is too big for as long as it maintains the inequality brought about by an outsize London.
I just can't understand why the EU is desirable Europe is a beautiful quilt of cultures and languages. Just the unification of the existing states has already destroyed vast swaths of the cultures that once existed. And hasn't american cultural feces already damaged enough of what's remains? Stop the nonsense already
If you look at the so called 'left' economists they all despise democracy and want to control it - hence why they pitch for helicopter money from central banks, not more spending from government. Neil Wilson
Ignoring that the monetary sovereign is the proper source of "helicopter money", why wouldn't such a drop be more democratic than, say, spending for the sake of special interests, as is so often the case?
Isn't the current need right now for nearly everyone to have some additional purchasing/debt paying power?
Speaking of democracy Neil, where's your support for eliminating special privileges for the usury cartel (eg. commercial banks, credit unions, etc.)? Is it perhaps too democratic for you that the population be able to deal with fiat conveniently and safely, like the usury cartel does, via inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank?
23 comments:
Thank you, Lord Keynes!
I'm just about the only liberal/progressive/leftie/social democrat, call it what you will, I know who favours pulling out of the EU. Neil does, but I don't "know" him.
Those in favour of the EU are at best incoherent; usually, they're just moronic: "I feel European", "The EU has prevented war", "The EU gives us rights", etc.
John, I'm spaniard and I also feel European, but I'm not blinded by absurd impractical internationalism "uber alles" of the European left (ie. Yanis Varofaukis) and their doomsday preaching ("it will be with the EU, or it won't be").
As much I would like to have a United States of Europe, it's not going to happen with the current stupid institutions and framework in place, and dreaming (again like YV) is not going to make it real. There is no 'incremental approach' to making the EU more democratic, it's not going to work as it's a co-opted institution beyond any sort of democratic control that can make it change from within.
The EU must be brought down before we could even start to dream to make a real political union and not this corporate lobbying travesty.
Ignacio, I say what I say as an internationalist, in the best sense of the term. I can't see any principled reason against an international federation of nations. Why stop at Europe? In practice, so much would have to change, the human race may not be around long enough.
In any case, I don't really know what it means to be European. I guess I'm just too provincially English and too internationalist for this feeling of "being European" to mean anything. Personally, I'd rather live in any number of Asian, North American or South American countries before I'd choose to live in some European countries. Some European countries just leave you cold. I do love Spain, though!
I have no wish to see any more European countries destroyed by this neoliberal virus. Greece, Cyprus, Hungary, Italy, Spain, Ireland, etc are quite enough. The institutions cannot be changed. Time to bring the temple down.
Don't you mean a confederation of nations John? Quite often people don't realise the difference between federation and confederation,
It is heartening to see such good sense on this issue in the comments section. I hope left-wing/labour/social democratic people are waking up.
If you study the issues carefully, the EU and -- above all -- the Eurozone are outrageous, catastrophic neoliberal disasters. They have caused tremendous suffering. The EU is a corporate tyranny of unelected incompetent neoliberal buffoons. They are basically taking a wrecking ball to Europe.
Andy, my bad! Confederation, yes. The human race won't be around long enough (or falls for nationalist gibberish) to create something as progressive as a federation of nations in solidarity with each other, in the same way that, say, California subsidises Arkansas. Since most people can't put away their conception of themselves as anything other that as belonging to a nation-state, the best we can hope for is confederation.
Anything, however, is better than the EU. Going back to nation-states would be a huge leap forward. I really thought that the core states would be pragmatic with respect to the so-called periphery. It's real sadism. They'd rather see whole nations implode and fascist parties become popular than give an inch. This sadism, however, has lurched into sadomasochism.
LK, our team will vote to remain in the EU. The violence meted out to the periphery means nothing to them. Solidarity and internationalism are mere words to this collection of deaf, dumb and blind.
Britain will abandon the EU, but continue with their own neoliberal train wreck.
Unfortunately Mike you are right. It doesn't really matter in or out it's the same mess.
The 'out' are just as deluded as the 'in' as nothing will change.
And so we carry on over the cliff to oblivion like lemmings.
Mike, you're wrong. We won't abandon the EU, and we'll also continue with out own neoliberal wrecking ball policies. A double whammy if there ever was one.
Andy, quite right about the delusion. If you caught Newsnight the other night, Ken Clarke was forthright: even if we vote to leave, we then have to go through the farce of negotiating which parts of the EU will stay in place. I suspect most of it will stay in place, no matter what.
The referendum has become a controlled way of letting off steam. At least a vote to leave is something to build on. A vote to stay in is condemning the UK and the other countries in the EU to further neoliberal madness. And we'll be doing it with our eyes closed for many decades to come because a vote to stay in would effectively kill off the issue for a long time to come.
For me John it's about the process how are you going to get from A to B? Shall start from my own party (Green) official line is in but reformed (so do the Tories, Labour etc want in but reform). Can see our policy online if you are interested.
So we want this and that...Great how are we going to make that process happen? *tumbleweed*
OK for out here is LK'S proposals as an out.
"(1) to protect the UK’s economic and political sovereignty;
(2) to protect its democracy;
(3) to protect its welfare state and social services;
(4) to have some hope for a Post Keynesian-style or MMT-style economic policy in the future;
(5) to take control of its borders and immigration policy, because the EU open borders policy is disastrous – disastrous for the welfare state, the working class, the real wage, the employment prospects of the British people and its very social cohesion."
Agree totally, great so right where is the process to get from where we are now to there? *tumbleweed* again as no actual tactic to get rid of the Neoliberals who are busy cutting MP'S (but making more Lords).
ISTM There are lots of proposals where we *want* to be but no actual process to get there. Lots of destinations but the trains ain't running.
I think the Eurosystem could work you just cant allow foreign claims to accrue, ie a form of 'capital controls' or wtf ... this is getting to Ramanan's point...
Greece already had it they had a 'common currency' with the drachma system but you can see here they wouldn't allow foreign claims to accrue between the cities:
"....with a view, however, to expeditions and journeys to other lands..the state must also possess a common Hellenic currency....If a private person is ever obliged to go abroad, let him have the consent of the magistrates and go;.... and if when he returns he has any foreign money remaining, let him give the surplus back to the treasury, and receive a corresponding sum in the local currency." Plato "Laws" c. 360 BC
that would work and there needn't be any 'fiscal union' to complicate it and the nations could have local democracy and do what they needed to do fiscally according to the local democratic outcomes ... you fix the exchange rate and let favor between the nations float... this would at least be TECHNICALLY possible to work... what Eurozone has now cant work there are impossible terms subject to default...
"The EU is a corporate tyranny of unelected incompetent neoliberal buffoons. "
Yes it is. It is the ultimately technocracy. But they have excellent PR.
And ultimately that is all that matters in a world where persuasion rules.
If you look at the so called 'left' economists they all despise democracy and want to control it - hence why they pitch for helicopter money from central banks, not more spending from government. The only government they want to see is one that has the power of a parish council or school governing body. In other words nothing.
With all these deluded servants of corporatism, there is only one question for the rest of us.
How to do a Trump.
"Ken Clarke was forthright: even if we vote to leave, we then have to go through the farce of negotiating which parts of the EU will stay in place. '
Unfortunately that's a bit of a lie.
The default position is that *all* of it stays in place - since you just grandfather the current setup to start with.
You then decide which bits you derogate from, and you do that slowly over time. This is not a tearing up of the rule book. This is a decision that the rule book from henceforth will be decided in Westminster not Brussels.
And it is a key point to get across. The process of Britain choosing its own direction will be precisely the same process as when Ireland chose its own direction and if Scotland chose its own direction. It would be an Iceberg moving slowly away from an ice sheet.
You'll note the framing from the Europhiles. That as soon as the vote comes in there will be an instant destruction of everything. That is completely false. There will be a lot of prior preparation and talking to people from Europe and across the World before the UK decides to make the break. It is very important to get across that the process in Article 50 is activated *at the behest* of the member nation. So it might be five years before that happens. It might be ten. Or it might all get sorted in a year.
If you get all your ducks in a row politically then the process of separation would be relatively painless - particularly as once the vote comes in and a declaration that the UK is seeking a free trade agreement along the lines of EFTA then entities within the economies will start to shift to the new reality ahead of time.
Don't fall for the framing of the europhiles. They are playing the "let's set some arbitrary deadline" game. Obviously they've been watching too much reality TV.
No country is going to abandon the EU right now, things have to get abysmally worse for that to happen, we are not close to that point yet. But real problems like massive immigration waves will make the collapse of the union eventually happen. If you think any country is going to abandon the EU right now you are incredible out of touch with European reality and don't know what you are talking about.
The group-think and PR machine is at continental level, anyone suggesting a country should abandon the EU is regarded as a crackpot, a weirdo or a member of the far-right (a badge very few people carry with honour in Europe) immediately over here. And don't forget that we don't live in fantasy-MMT world, in our current reality people thinks that governments do run out of money, so in that context they don't see as being out of the EU. Even in the UK the anti-EU group is a minority, and many of those who are debating if they should vote yes what want is a 'better bargain'.
A lot of people perceives that the EU is a protection against their own out-of-control politicians, they praise and love central-bankism and neoliberal dictatorship from Brussels. No political order comes to existence w/o population collaboration, none ever, again as in the case of neoliberal mainstream political parties, there is a proportion of the population which wield most political power and are enablers of the current regime (probably around ~35%-25% of the population).
Clarification: talking about continental Europe here, but even in the UK I think the odds of abandoning the EU are very low right now.
"Agree totally, great so right where is the process to get from where we are now to there?"
The process is first to recover the parliament and make it sovereign. There is little point standing for election to a School Governing council and expecting to fix unemployment from that position.
So the trick is to put the power in place. And then let the Tories go nuts. Because, without putting too fine a point on it, real change only happens at pinch points. So you need to bring one about.
If the left doesn't do it, then the level of immigration will get to a point where a Trump arises to deal with it.
The one thing Blair had going for him is that he realised that the ERM disaster, the subsequent recession and the fact that Ken Clarke was nicely setting things up on a plate gave him a huge opportunity. All he had to do was put the righteous left in their box.
Spot on.The Mania and dogma is continent wide.The pro-EU opinion is orthodoxy.Despite the fact that the EU pushes privatisation, subsidises wealth landowners,prohibits government fiscal expansion (most notably in the Euro-zone) and promotes the interests of Bankers.
I also feel actively European,we have shared cultural roots and values and a Civilisation which set us apart from Turkey,ME and North Africa.
But what the EU did too Greece is sickening and enraging.Typical of a neo-liberal elitist I recall Christine lagarde saying she was more concerned about poverty in the third world than in Greece.the Depression imposed on Greece gave lie to the myth that EU has anything to do with European solidarity.
It seems that most people in the EU think that the present system is superior to the previous one, warts and all, and they are reluctant to return to another system that they think worked worse that the present one.
It's important to remember that countries like Greece and Spain were military dictatorships within living memory. That informs opinion.
I was watching a chat between Galloway and Farage and they made the important point that in continental Europe it is the young that are not that keen on the EU, whereas in the UK it is the young that are largely Europhile.
That in it self shows the disparate views across the continent based upon differing histories and differing presents. It's not really feasible to shoehorn all that into a single superstructure.
It's very likely that the UK is too big for as long as it maintains the inequality brought about by an outsize London.
I just can't understand why the EU is desirable Europe is a beautiful quilt of cultures and languages. Just the unification of the existing states has already destroyed vast swaths of the cultures that once existed. And hasn't american cultural feces already damaged enough of what's remains? Stop the nonsense already
Europeans will wake up when they realize they no longer have a social safety net?
If you look at the so called 'left' economists they all despise democracy and want to control it - hence why they pitch for helicopter money from central banks, not more spending from government. Neil Wilson
Ignoring that the monetary sovereign is the proper source of "helicopter money", why wouldn't such a drop be more democratic than, say, spending for the sake of special interests, as is so often the case?
Isn't the current need right now for nearly everyone to have some additional purchasing/debt paying power?
Speaking of democracy Neil, where's your support for eliminating special privileges for the usury cartel (eg. commercial banks, credit unions, etc.)? Is it perhaps too democratic for you that the population be able to deal with fiat conveniently and safely, like the usury cartel does, via inherently risk-free accounts at the central bank?
Post a Comment