Sunday, May 8, 2016

Bill Mitchell — The Wall Street-US Treasury Complex

Today’s part of the story, is to trace the growing US influence on the IMF and the way it manipulated that institution to further its ‘free market’ agenda on a global scale. We will consider what Jagdish Bhagwati called the “Wall Street-Treasury complex”, which referred to the way in which financial market interests in the US combined with (pressured) the US Treasury Department to advance the myth that liberalisation of global capital flows would deliver massive benefits in the post-1971 period after the convertible currency, fixed exchange rate system collapsed.
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
The Wall Street-US Treasury Complex
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia


Kaivey said...

Good hard working people work hard, or are conditioned to work hard, our are forced to work hard, but the capitalist system is a sham, or a scam. Those who don't do any work are not the underclass, but the over class.

They over class discovered that they didn't need slavery, or serfdom, to live a life of luxury, opulence, gluttony, and very little real work, by inventing 'capitalism' where social pressure - due to their control of the media propaganda machine - is used to get ordinary people to work their nuts off all their lives to enrich the truly lazy, while blaming all the problems on the poor.

Yes, many of the the over class might be going at it 24/7 (but not that many when you include all the hangers on, and extended families) but that is no more hard work than a bank robber on a roll doing job lot, hit and run, for years on end.

Matt Franko said...

"After all, it was the US that abandoned the fixed-exchange rate system in August 1971 and the logic of the floating exchange rate system was that the freedom of the exchange rate to float freed domestic policy from having to deal with external imbalances."

Its not a "free floating" system the system is regulated...

Matt Franko said...

Comment over there:

"Professor, the U.K. is no Latin American banana republic. It is not right to place blame for decisions made by the U.K. government on the United States."

I'm not the only one seeing this "neo-liberal conspiracy!" line of thought...

Simsalablunder said...

"I'm not the only one seeing this "neo-liberal conspiracy!" line of thought..."

Yes, we already know you see a conspiracy which is not there. If someone else sees that too doesn't help your case. It only adds to the nut case numbers.

Simsalablunder said...

"It is not right to place blame for decisions made by the U.K. government on the United States."

It's the right wingers usual way of arguing where nothing is connected whenever it suits them. Which BTW is how neo-liberals and neo-cons also argue.

Tom Hickey said...

"Professor, the U.K. is no Latin American banana republic. It is not right to place blame for decisions made by the U.K. government on the United States."

This is actually not chiefly an economic matter but a political one, international relations (IR) to be exact. In IR, there are dominant and subordinate nations. In an imperial system, one nation is dominant and the others are subordinate and the imperial authority does not brook insubordination.

The US came out of WWII as an empire — the next iteration of the British Empire — vying with the USSR as the next iteration of the Russian Empire. The rest of the world, other than China, was subordinate. The Chinese were not yet in a position to extend the Chinese Empire. That is happening now.

The UK and continental Europe are subordinate to the American Empire in the eyes of the US leaders wrt to IR. This has political and economic implications regarding the relative behavior of nations. The US is polite about it, calling the Anglo-American relationship "a special relationship," but there is not question about who is dominant and who is subordinate. Tony Blair demonstrated that.

The big issue wrt to IR now is that the US regards itself as the global hegemony and views both Russia and China as subordinate. They are not becoming increasingly insubordinate and the US is determined not to stand for it. So it is aligning other subordinate nations against the rise of the Russian and Chinese empires in the future.

Tom Hickey said...

BTW, those who don't understand the above are either not going to understand what US leaders are saying or else be taken in by the propaganda and disinformation.

Almost nothing of note that US leaders say is true. It's messaging of one sort or another that is designed to produce desired effects. It's also somewhat encoded so that noise obscured the signal other than for the intended recipients. But the "noise" is not random either. It contains disinfomation.

Bob said...

No indication that Russia or China view themselves as subordinate. Guess they're not receiving the 'signals'.

Tom Hickey said...

Oh, they have received the signal alright and returned it.

27 Middle Finger GIFs Because F*ck You That's Why

Russia and China are being insubordinate, so the US military is bearing down on them, with vassals, I means allies, in tow. Russia and China are arming up.