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.
Nuclear Keynesianism? Jawbs?Justice would be a lot cheaper and less dangerous too.
Russia is monetarily sovereign, so cheaper really isn't an issue. Could they put their resources to better use? I think so, but all depends on what their objectives are.
Actually, it's just an adaptation of the current space program to military use.Russia, China and the US all have advanced rocketry programs, but the US is sort of on hold for lack of "affordability." Expect those funds to be forthcoming now with increased military competition.The good news is that there will be useful R& D, and spin-offs.The bad news doesn't get worse since humanity can already destroy life on earth.Actually advanced space programs may come in handy if we have to abandon ship.
Yes, Russia is monetarily sovereign but so is the US, the UK and Australia and all four act like fiat is intrinsically scarce and expensive instead of inherently plentiful and dirt cheap.And why is that? Inflation fears?But government privileged banks create 90%+ of the money supply ("loans create deposits" but due to government privileges, only largely virtual liabilities wrt the public).So why not de-priviledge the banks to create more fiscal spending space for monetary sovereigns such as the governments of Russia, the US, the UK and Australia? Rather than let the government privileged banks impose spending restraints on monetary sovereigns?This is where most MMT advocates fall short - they are unwilling to de-privilege the banks - and thus untie the hands and the purse strings of monetary sovereigns.
Government privileged banks don't impose restraints on monetary sovereigns; they help convince monetary sovereigns to impose restraints on themselves. This may or may not continue if your plans are set in motion, depending on who has the better marketing game. My money is on the banks (pun intended), but I hope I'm wrong.
Government privileged banks don't impose restraints on monetary sovereigns; they help convince monetary sovereigns to impose restraints on themselves. SixWhy should they since an improved economy reduces loan defaults and encourages more borrowing?
If the government spends more money into existence (exogenous money), less borrowing from banks is necessary. Also, who profits from loan defaults?
Downward pressure on interest rates and higher debt-free income flows means in general less borrowing and less income for banks. The move towards arbitration and derivative issuing to increase income from banks tells you that their traditional business has been falling apart.Most people doesn't borrow unless they have to, and banks are already hurting and will continue to do so because as the demographic pyramid shifts and the borrowing needed for housing decreases, which is the main driver underlying most credit growth and flows.Banks will slowly die on their own when their political power breaks down due to unsustainability, because there will be no need for them in the future (most payment services will be taken over by competing digital businesses), it's going to happen naturally as most deep structural changes in the financial system do, but it will take a while. It will happen though, just look at Japan, banks are just gigantic zombies that are not what they used to be, and western finansialised system is struggling as it decreases its importance and leverage too.Unequal distribution of purchasing power is not, and never wasn't, an issue created by the banking system, it is, and always will be, a political problem, whether the banking system is used or not to enact those policies, it's just a mean to an end, not the end itself. Changing the system superficially, while not changing the belief system and power structure underlying the superficial functioning in the system, won't change any thing on the long run.If you want to change it, you will have to change the belief system of the people, otherwise it will just regress to the mean, regardless of how you originally engineer your financial and monetary system.
If you want to change it, you will have to change the belief system of the people, otherwise it will just regress to the mean, regardless of how you originally engineer your financial and monetary system. IgnacioDon't think so since ethical fiat creation would replace all forms* of fiat creation for the private sector with equal distributions of new fiat to all citizens.It would quickly become an additional "3rd rail of politics" - touch it and you die politically.*e.g. currency swaps, the Discount Window, Open Market Purchases, Interest on Reserves, etc.
Unequal distribution of purchasing power is not, and never wasn't, an issue created by the banking system, IgnacioNot so since the deposits of the poor, the least so-called creditworthy, are held captive within the government enabled/enforced/subsidized usury cartel of depository institutions to lower the borrowing costs of the rich, the most so-called creditworthy.This is unjust on its face.it is, and always will be, a political problem, whether the banking system is used or not to enact those policies, it's just a mean to an end, not the end itself. IgnacioI'm amazed at the stubborn defense of government-subsidized private credit creation - a means by which the rich steal from the poor - from both the Right AND the Left. It's uncanny.Does the end justify the means? And what end do we have anyway but an increasingly dangerous world?
I'm up for that, Andrew. Sounds like the way to go.
"Changing the system superficially, while not changing the belief system and power structure underlying the superficial functioning in the system, won't change any thing on the long run."This is the NT message while most still cling to the OT alternative where they think they can just make a list of "rules" and then publication of those "rules" itself will somehow lead to ideal outcomes...Like AA will say "deprivdge the banks!" and then allege do that and everything will turn out roses... doesnt work that way.. just write a "rule" like "thou shalt not steal!" and then nobody will ever steal LOL.... 'thou shall not kill!" blah, blah.......
"I'm amazed at the stubborn defense of government-subsidized private credit creation "Nobody is defending that stubbornly or otherwise... you are being the stubborn one in your assertion that your institutional arrangements alone can somehow lead to more ideal outcomes...
This is the NT message while most still cling to the OT alternative where they think they can just make a list of "rules" and then publication of those "rules" itself will somehow lead to ideal outcomes... FrankoWho's going to even listen to your message if you defend injustice or say it doesn't matter?Is this not why the churches in the US are increasingly irrelevant? Or even seen as the enemy?Old Testament alternative? No, I take the ENTIRE Bible seriously and you (incredibly!) don't.
... you are being the stubborn one in your assertion that your institutional arrangements alone can somehow lead to more ideal outcomes... FrankoIs not Social Security still the "Third rail of US politics"? And isn't SS, pitiful as it is, more ideal than leaving the population to the tender mercies of a government-privileged usury cartel and the rich?Didn't the Great Depression prove that the churches and private charity were not able to cope with the damage a government-privileged usury cartel could cause?
Thanks Kaivey. Your encouragement is timely since I've apparently been banned at Billy Blog.Bill's a very nice guy so I can only assume that some snake complained to him.Not that I need much human encouragement but you do reveal that Neil's assertion that "no one is listening" is false.
Churches are irrelevant to what we are talking about here (economics/economic outcomes) as the church institution has no authority here... its the govt institution that has the authority (Rom 13)... an authority which is not being imposed...You stubbornly keep talking about some arcane rule or detailed institutional arrangements related to fiscal agency meanwhile the libertarian morons in positions of rule are all around saying "we're out of money!".... How about putting first things first... the foundational problem is as Ignacio points out with our basic political belief system (libertarian) and power (authority) ignorance...
And you are not even correct on the facts of the accounting... you keep saying the banks "create the money!" meanwhile this FY the US govt is on track to spend about $4.5T and bank credit is up maybe 700B with perhaps some additional loans paid off....So where do you get that the "cartel" is "giving out all the money!" ? Govt spending is dwarfing additional bank loans/leases
... its the govt institution that has the authority (Rom 13)... an authority which is not being imposed... FrankoWe live in a democratic republic and as such it can be argued that the citizens are the ultimate authority (under God). Christians are citizens too and it discredits them and the Gospel that they are so ignorant wrt justice.
Maybe you should move to Spain, Franko? Maybe they'll elect you to be their new Generalissimo?
So where do you get that the "cartel" is "giving out all the money!" ? FrankoThat's an interesting question (even though it misquotes me) but since the public is not allowed to use fiat except in the form of physical fiat - bills and coins - it's easy to answer.To writ: according to the Fed there are about $1.4 trillion in FRNs and coins in circulation and $11.2 trillion in bank deposits for a total "money" supply of $11.2T + $1.4T = $12.6 trillion.So 11.2/12.6 = 88.8%.OK, I was wrong by a couple of percentage points since I said "90%+"
"I'm amazed at the stubborn defense of government-subsidized private credit creation - a means by which the rich steal from the poor - from both the Right AND the Left. It's uncanny."It's not a defence, I'm just pointing the obvious: touching on surface of something while not changing the core beliefs that motivate that system in the first place changes absolutely nothing.Take slavery... slavery as over in the West not because it was outlawed, it was outlawed because the core beliefs of society changed towards slavery.You have causality all the way backwards, hence just wasting your energy pounding about things that 99.99% of the people doesn't understand or care about (as if having a deposit account at a CB or private bank is going to magically change their understanding of monetary and fiscal operations).
"Your encouragement is timely since I've apparently been banned at Billy Blog."Because derailing and obnoxiously repeating the same over and over and over is annoying. That's why you get banned from every single internet blog.When you have read the same for a 100th time from the same person it gets tiresome.This thread is called: "Mikhail Klikushin — Russia Building Hypersonic Aircraft Capable of Dropping Nuclear Bomb on US From Space" and yet here we are discussing the same thing for the 100th time.
Actually, the discussion at billy blog was about a Job Guarantee. I pointed out that a UBI would be as popular and politically untouchable as Social Security is in the US. But somehow, jobs, even make-work jobs, are more important to some than incomes - even though they know that incomes are all that is needed. Why is that? Is this crisis just an excuse to further an authoritarian if not totalitarian agenda?And come now. It's not such a stretch to link nuclear weapons to the usury cartel since that cartel was a major cause of the Great Depression which in turn was a major cause of WWII which killed 50-65 million of us and wasted enormous amounts of natural resources besides.
So 11.2/12.6 = 88.8%. aaExcept I should subtract out the deposits that were NOT created by bank lending since though "bank loans create deposits" not all deposits are created by bank lending.However, I won't since those other deposits represent essentially forced loans of fiat to the banking cartel since citizens are not allowed fiat accounts of their own at the central bank.So the government-privileged banking cartel has created or legally embezzled about 89% of the total money supply.
It's not a defence, I'm just pointing the obvious: touching on surface of something while not changing the core beliefs that motivate that system in the first place changes absolutely nothing.That's what blogging is about - education. And learning too via on-line discussions. And hammering out solutions.Just look at Hillary and Trump or just about any politician. It's obvious they need educating.And don't write off 99.9% of the population as unteachable - especially wrt to equal protection under the law and justice.
The source of WoMD has nothing to do with banking and all with human lust for violence and dominance, again the cause is the underlying belief system and behaviour of people. The system will just fit to that behaviour, not the other way around. Systems are a collection of behaviours, to change behaviour you have to change education and believes, pointing out rules written in the Old Testament (for example) and saying "do so because it says in the Old Testament, just trust me on this!" won't work.Likewise, as much as stupid bankers are stupid and they should be allowed to fail for their misdoings, the rise of the Nazi had more to do with the stupid short-sighted war reparations imposed on Germany after WWI (a mistake that wasn't repeated after WWII, took a bit to learn that lesson) which destroyed the real economy and the feudal conditions in Czarist Russia which provoked the revolution, the importance of the banking system was anecdotal. In Japan the GD was feint due to the finance minister being competent, unfortunately that doesn't stop people from following a stupid religious believe in an Emperor-God and a military out of hand.There has been many monetary regimes (w/o central banks, without deposit insurance, based on species, based on payment letters where the regimes issued those letters, without banking, etc. etc. etc.), and all regress to the mean, the mean being the mean behaviour of the population and/or their leader. The day people believes more on 'print and spend' and 'don't let the banks create credit' the faster it will change to what you want. And the best we can hope is that better economy changes some behaviours or gives us more opportunity for that.And don't write off 99.9% of the population as unteachable - especially wrt to equal protection under the law and justice.I don't, but you think that if you change a law it will produce changes in society. While I'm telling you that law changes if there is a want for change in society.The whole EU, EMU, MENA wars and disasters is testament to that. Just imposing normative rules by law does not change behaviour. Do you have German ancestors maybe? You seem to be strongly rule-based, which patently most of humanity does not function (even those who think they do usually don't!). People gets around rules all the time if their belief systems don't align with them.That's why we ended with our current financial and monetary system arrangement in the first place as much as I dislike it.
"99.9% of the population as unteachable"They might not be unteachable but they certainly learn the hard way... while we learn the easy way...This is us learning:Someone says: "we're NOT 'out of money!'"Then we say: "ok, got it..."This is the easy way....
the rise of the Nazi had more to do with the stupid short-sighted war reparations imposed on Germany IgnacioYes those were stupid but the year before the GD the Nazis were a minor political power but by 1934 Hitler was Chancellor of Germany.Wiki used to list the Great Depression as a major cause of WWII till I started harping on that fact and then mysteriously, suddenly Adolph Hitler was the sole cause of WWII or nearly so.
It aggravated the conditions upon which war reparations had to be made, Germany wasn't in a position to carry out expansionary fiscal policy. Germany back then was in fact under the same stupid thesis that are at play in the EU with 'balanced budgets' and 'expansionary austerity'. Exactly the same.When exports decreased unable to finance war reparations then the conditions became so dire they destroyed the real economy (or what was remaining of it). So yeah, indirectly the Great Depression caused Nazi ascension, and indirectly the bankers created the GD. But the GD importance would have been dwarfed if proper fiscal policy had been applied in time instead of falling pray of the same stupid economic policy that still is being applied today. Indeed, slow learners.This is the type of uncertainty we have to accept and deal with ex-post; then there is that the self-inflicted 'uncertainty' because wrong idiotic policy ex-ante (and economists are always complaining about problems created by themselves, this type of totally avoidable uncertainty).Credit is endogenous, you are always going to get credit, with or without banking. I wrote it down here once in an answer to one fo your posts: most of the current bubble in China does not have the officialdom banking system at its origin, is inter-household and corporate leveraging at source. The private sector will always find out ways to bend the rules, or to exploit any potential advantage, is how things work and will work in a capitalist economy. Because the belief-system of those who have capacity to "exploit" the rules is so, they will always try, and try to fix any problem created after the fact. You can't change that by removing deposit insurance, for example. In practice what will happen is that you will face a depression that you will have to avoid bailing out the population one way or an other just adding enough funds to convert bad money for good money (which is what is going on in China, or what has been going on in the West for years), because again, the belief-system of the majority is to avoid pain at short term at all costs. The underlying behaviour is what shapes rules and systems design, not just normative, but practical, and this is so for the majority of the people.You want to change that? I would too, but I'm not holding my breadth because that has been going on since forever (as soon as there were surplus) and is deeply ingrained culturally pretty much in every human culture since ancient times (read history of debt of Graeber).Changing that underlying behaviour and belief-system is what takes a very long time and usually is a difficult process. We still haven't removed many forms of slavery and abuse culturally, even on the most developed nations, and this has been a struggle for thousands and thousands of years (as an Old Testament reader you should know very well). Go figure, it is all a very slow grind.Majority of people are very slow learners when it comes to dogmatic cultural inheritance, and that includes things like banking, lending behaviour, etc. Most people does not have an inquiring and sceptical mind by nature.
Just imposing normative rules by law does not change behaviour. Really? How many non-rich people do you think will lend to uninsured banks the day-to-day liquidity they need to live on, given a genuine alternative? Not many, I'd bet.
But the GD importance would have been dwarfed if proper fiscal policy had been applied in time instead of falling pray of the same stupid economic policy that still is being applied today. Indeed, slow learners. IgnacioYes, slow learners because the money system is unnecessarily complex.Let's all be allowed accounts at the central bank and other privileges for the banks abolished too and then the fiat and credit system will be much more comprehensible - not to mention much more just too.The true slow learners are those who think an inherently unjust system can be made to work properly if just the "right" regulations and people are in place.
It's only able to be judged or "set right" by people in positions of authority imposing judgement... How else you going to do it?You could look at the whole world system as unjust... How is an injustice judged or "set right"? By people, ideally very qualified people... Not "the rules".. Moron libertarians going all around all over the place saying "we're out of money!" or "the govt is bankruptcy!" are simply not qualified for positions of authority... These are very stupid and weak disgraced human beings....
How is an injustice judged or "set right"? By people, ideally very qualified people... Not "the rules".. FrankoBy people, according to principles, not necessarily rules. And where are those principles to be found for Christians?Moron libertarians going all around all over the place saying "we're out of money!" or "the govt is bankruptcy!" are simply not qualified for positions of authority... Agreed. Moreover, it's a disgrace when Christians put more faith in gold-worshiping, deflation loving, misery loving atheist/agnostic Austrian economists than they do in Scripture. And why? Partly because they're ignorant of the Old Testament. And partly because of disbelief of Matthew 22:16-22 ("Render to Ceasar ..."), Romans 13:1-7, Romans 13:8, etc. in the New Testament.
" it's a disgrace when Christians put more faith in gold-worshiping, deflation loving, misery loving atheist/agnostic Austrian economists than they do in Scripture."Now we are getting somewhere double A....
"Russia Building Hypersonic Aircraft Capable of Dropping Nuclear Bomb on US From Space"Isn't that ICBMs already do?
I'll admit to having once believed the Austrian Economists - even as a purported Christian.It was by finally reading the entire Bible (I had neglected the Old Testament too), starting around 2008 (after a wrenching personal tragedy made me desperate enough to do so), that I was able to escape those miserable gold-bugs.But there should be no surprise there since Jesus says:If you remain in my word, you are truly disciples of mine and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free John 8:31-32
Isn't that ICBMs already do?The nuclear trident consists of land-based ICBMs, nuclear subs, and strategic bombers.
Post a Comment