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.
Consequences of monetary versus fiscal policy — asset appreciation versus economic stimulus, enriching asset owners but leaving workers out in the cold. Monetarism versus Keynesianism.
Thanks, Matt. Being a libertarian is no excuse, IMHO. It's not like the free market has provided any fiscal stimulus. And it is not exactly like free banking provided much in the way of countercyclical stimulus back when we had it in the US. If it had done so in 1907, we never would have had a Federal Reserve system. Nobody would have felt the need for it.
The real problem is much deeper than stimulus. The real problem is structural stemming from an assault on labor and wages, deregulation and tax shifts that began in the early eighties. The rich have been working on this set up for a long time and have contorted the system for their benefit. As long as wages are stagnant then the economy won’t grow. Just think the Fed did QE to inflate the price of real estate and got by with it. If a person was looking to buy a house for the past few years how is he supposed to feel knowing that the Fed was running up the price of housing? The Fed is a bankster organization and this country is run by bankers. Democracy is only an illusion.
Whitney misses the mark when he ignores the role of Congress in the failure to provide fiscal stimulus.
It's true that the US Congress didn't provide fiscal stimulus. Does that fact make the Fed's actions effective in promoting recovery? Does that fact deny that its actions only benefit financial speculators?
@Matt Franko said...
Whitney probably a libertarian Bill....
What makes you believe that? For that matter, from what it is written there, can anyone tell whether Whitney is gay or straight, born-again Xtian, Satanist or Catholic, vegetarian, virgin, married, balding or diabetic? What colour is his underwear?
And it is not exactly like free banking provided much in the way of countercyclical stimulus back when we had it in the US. bill
Well, we've never really had free banking in the US since it is apparent, at least in retrospect, that the monetary sovereign or its central bank should provide accounts for all citizens so they are not limited to physical fiat or forced to trust private banks.
But as for stimulus, that is clearly the responsibility of the monetary sovereign and it should be FISCAL stimulus, not loans to or asset buying from the rich since that clearly violates equal protection under the law.
Magpie he is distrustful of authority he takes the "conspiracy!" route here:
First he asks (btw finally getting to this question after we have been investigating it here for 8 years... better late than never...):
"So, which is it? Is the Fed a moron or a liar?"
Then he asserts (btw without evidence, Darwin coming in here maybe???)
"in fact, the members of the FOMC are extremely-bright, well-educated professionals who have a solid grasp of the economy and the many intricacies of the financial system. These are smart guys, real smart."
There is no evidence of what he is claiming here they dont evidence understanding even the basics of system operations and then:
"And while rising stock prices don’t necessarily prove that the Fed has an ulterior motive; identifying the people who benefit from those inflated prices certainly does."
He goes full on "neo-liberal conspiracy!"... if you take the "neo-liberal conspiracy!" route it is because of a libertarian political bias ....
Meanwhile he is as much an idiot as the Fed people here with all his metaphor:
"When the Fed pumps liquidity directly into the financial system, that liquidity cannot accurately be called “monetary stimulus”. ...... Even so, $3 trillion is a lot of money, enough money to light a fire under stocks and send them into the stratosphere."
'Pump it up!' LOL! "light a fire!".... "dumping money!" "economy is going to the morgue!"...
Then he says: "How many times are we going to go through this drill before we disband the Fed and start from scratch?"
"Disband the Fed!" LOL
This is textbook libertarian 101...
The guy is probably a Journalism major ie not qualified and left libertarian political bias... he doesnt understand how the system operates either so he just falls back on his political biases as he has no science skills to lead him towards the truth... uses literature devices (metaphor, hyperbole, analogy, ...) instead of science and math ...
If you dont understand things all you have left is your political biases to guide you...
12 comments:
How many times are we going to go through this drill before we disband the Fed and start from scratch?
Except someone, either the Fed or the US Treasury Department, should provide inherently risk-free accounts for all US citizens.
And since those accounts are risk-free then government-provided deposit insurance should be abolished too.
Whitney misses the mark when he ignores the role of Congress in the failure to provide fiscal stimulus.
Whitney probably a libertarian Bill....
Whitney is the kind of guy Lord Keynes is trying to ditch in the emergent alt-left
LK would probably ditch the whole Counterpunch crew....
Let congress debate interest rates and let a panel of economists have power of the purse.
Thanks, Matt. Being a libertarian is no excuse, IMHO. It's not like the free market has provided any fiscal stimulus. And it is not exactly like free banking provided much in the way of countercyclical stimulus back when we had it in the US. If it had done so in 1907, we never would have had a Federal Reserve system. Nobody would have felt the need for it.
The real problem is much deeper than stimulus. The real problem is structural stemming from an assault on labor and wages, deregulation and tax shifts that began in the early eighties. The rich have been working on this set up for a long time and have contorted the system for their benefit. As long as wages are stagnant then the economy won’t grow.
Just think the Fed did QE to inflate the price of real estate and got by with it. If a person was looking to buy a house for the past few years how is he supposed to feel knowing that the Fed was running up the price of housing? The Fed is a bankster organization and this country is run by bankers. Democracy is only an illusion.
Okay, I'll bite.
@Bill said...
Whitney misses the mark when he ignores the role of Congress in the failure to provide fiscal stimulus.
It's true that the US Congress didn't provide fiscal stimulus. Does that fact make the Fed's actions effective in promoting recovery? Does that fact deny that its actions only benefit financial speculators?
@Matt Franko said...
Whitney probably a libertarian Bill....
What makes you believe that? For that matter, from what it is written there, can anyone tell whether Whitney is gay or straight, born-again Xtian, Satanist or Catholic, vegetarian, virgin, married, balding or diabetic? What colour is his underwear?
And it is not exactly like free banking provided much in the way of countercyclical stimulus back when we had it in the US. bill
Well, we've never really had free banking in the US since it is apparent, at least in retrospect, that the monetary sovereign or its central bank should provide accounts for all citizens so they are not limited to physical fiat or forced to trust private banks.
But as for stimulus, that is clearly the responsibility of the monetary sovereign and it should be FISCAL stimulus, not loans to or asset buying from the rich since that clearly violates equal protection under the law.
Magpie he is distrustful of authority he takes the "conspiracy!" route here:
First he asks (btw finally getting to this question after we have been investigating it here for 8 years... better late than never...):
"So, which is it? Is the Fed a moron or a liar?"
Then he asserts (btw without evidence, Darwin coming in here maybe???)
"in fact, the members of the FOMC are extremely-bright, well-educated professionals who have a solid grasp of the economy and the many intricacies of the financial system. These are smart guys, real smart."
There is no evidence of what he is claiming here they dont evidence understanding even the basics of system operations and then:
"And while rising stock prices don’t necessarily prove that the Fed has an ulterior motive; identifying the people who benefit from those inflated prices certainly does."
He goes full on "neo-liberal conspiracy!"... if you take the "neo-liberal conspiracy!" route it is because of a libertarian political bias ....
Meanwhile he is as much an idiot as the Fed people here with all his metaphor:
"When the Fed pumps liquidity directly into the financial system, that liquidity cannot accurately be called “monetary stimulus”. ...... Even so, $3 trillion is a lot of money, enough money to light a fire under stocks and send them into the stratosphere."
'Pump it up!' LOL! "light a fire!".... "dumping money!" "economy is going to the morgue!"...
Then he says: "How many times are we going to go through this drill before we disband the Fed and start from scratch?"
"Disband the Fed!" LOL
This is textbook libertarian 101...
The guy is probably a Journalism major ie not qualified and left libertarian political bias... he doesnt understand how the system operates either so he just falls back on his political biases as he has no science skills to lead him towards the truth... uses literature devices (metaphor, hyperbole, analogy, ...) instead of science and math ...
If you dont understand things all you have left is your political biases to guide you...
Post a Comment