"Finding the Money" Trailer.
Deadline
Giant Pictures & Kanopy Acquire ‘Finding The Money,’ Documentary That Explodes Myth Of Deficit Spending
Matthew Carey
"Finding the Money" Trailer.
Deadline
Giant Pictures & Kanopy Acquire ‘Finding The Money,’ Documentary That Explodes Myth Of Deficit Spending
Matthew Carey
24 comments:
But this is isn't Hollywood and Finding The Money is not the kind of 'documentary' that Oppenheimer was. This press release is delusional.
Here is an indication of the reception this documentary will garner:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Red_Pill
From MGTOW to MMTGTOW?
Actually, I think this is very cool and hopefully will help MMT gain some traction in policy circles.
Just as Stephanie Kelton's book is very cool.
Removing a-holes from power is how you gain traction in policy circles.
I'm sick of these appeals to polite society. It's like you guys you live in another world, where failure doesn't threaten your personal circumstances. Compare that with Cassie Jaye, who had to crowd source her documentary, and risked being cancelled by irate feminists.
Yo… the people getting elected are all debt doomsday people…
They're also Zionists, yet the election is being fought on the "issue" of Trump being a fascist.
MMT nowhere in the picture...
There is the open borders issue, but where is Trump on that?
Plenty of documentaries on the flood of migrants invading the US...
Not sure what your point is…
Mine is that voters vote for the debt doomsday people… politicians do better who make this “reduce the deficit!” appeal to voters…
"They're also Zionists, yet the election is being fought on the "issue" of Trump being a fascist."
Peter Pan,
I'm a Jew and a Zionist. You got a problem with that?
My point is all the major candidates are on the same side with regard to those issues. Voters don't have a voice in the matter.
Whether or not you're concerned about the debt, Congress is full of debt hawks.
Regardless if you oppose or support Israel, Trump and Biden support Israel.
Open borders? Democrats and Republicans don't appear to be up in arms about it. It's not a priority.
So the election is being fought on frivolous stuff where politicians can pretend there is disagreement. Around half the electorate don't participate in this circus. They see its getting them nowhere.
I'm a Jew and a Zionist. You got a problem with that?
If I were an American I'd have a problem with that.
Randy Wray's book - How MMT can save America - has absolutely nothing in it.
This new MMT book by Bill is going to be different lol.
https://realprogressives.org/podcast_episode/episode-270-capitalism-class-and-mmt-with-bill-mitchell/
I had a feeling this was happening about 7 years ago.
"And so most of the post-Keynesian literature implicitly adopts that view, as well, in my view. So, I’ve never considered myself part of that tradition, that Keynes tradition. I always considered my work as part of the Marxian tradition, and MMT is really agnostic about all of that. And that’s why it’s only part of the story.
Yes, it provides a first class lens into monetary operations, but it doesn’t have a theory of power, and you have to add that ideological layer for it to be, in my view, a purposeful framework for advancing systemic change. Just have an MMT understanding, provides you with no additional tools to work out systemic change.
And I think that’s what- over the last many years of the development of MMT- you’ve seen the MMT community- we could use the word fracture, I won’t use that word- the MMT community dispersed, into those who argue for change within the system, and those in the minority- like me- who argue that the system has to change.
And I think that’s the difference.
And I think that we’re going to have a monetary system in a new era, and MMT is still going to be applicable to that monetary system.
So, that’s why everybody still should be learning MMT, but we need a much wider structure of resistance and challenge. And that’s where my work’s heading, towards the end of my career, I guess. "
I guess that's why he never took part in the " finding the money " Australian tour probably for ethical reasons again and certain groups behind it ?
Why he likes the Gower Initiative of modern money studies so much ?
There is a clear difference between those who argue for change within the system, and those who argue that the system has to change. Stephanie and Warren and EU MMT'rs like Murphy and Ehnts are definitely in the first camp.
Bill has always been his own man and always stood by his own principles and I like that. Those who argue for change within the system never seen to recognise America is a big part of the problem and Stephanie and Warren definitely fit in that camp.
“ who argue that the system has to change.”
The EDUCATION system has to change..,,
Bill Mitchell and Richard Wolff are economists in the Marxian tradition. Wolff is aware of MMT, but realizes it's not enough to change the system.
'America First' populists don't want to change the economic system, but they have a better chance of reforming it than far left ideologues.
Wray and Kelton must realize that the fix is in. Approaching this from within gives them zero leverage.
Bill has been treated similar to Thomas Piketty. Confronting academia with evidence doesn't accomplish anything. If it challenges the established narrative, they ignore you.
Buffer stock employment as a superior alternative to Philips Curve orthodoxy = crickets.
“ Confronting academia with evidence doesn't accomplish anything. If it challenges the established narrative, they ignore you.”
When has that ever NOT happened in the liberal Art academe?
Economics as liberal arts?
If that were true, conservatives would reject it.
More like the dark arts...
Economics as it presently exists is a form of propaganda for a particular socio-politico-economic position or type of position, at least in my view.
There are different position, so different "schools" of economics, e.g., methodological approaches. All the reasoning and "evidence," such as it is given the subject matter, is marshaled toward promoting the preferred position, whatever it maybe.
Choice is based on value and values are the foundations of ideology. There are different value-system and ideologies. This is studied in sociology, a "social science," that is a hodge-podge field that is "sciency" or "sciencey."
Since there is no science of economics, at least yet, this is just the way it it.
But if there is a science of economics, it will be a social science with connections to life science (evolutionary theory). BTW, psychology is "sciency" or "sceincey" but it is not a science, yet anyway.
I would list econ and psych as they are presently practiced under the humanities along with philosophy and history in their current state. They are a mixture of both philosophy and history with other things added to the mix. They are "science-like" to the degree that they can be quantized and configured as empirical using data.
It occurs to me that "propaganda" may come across as to harsh since the term has acquired a primarily negative connotation. It some cases, "propaganda" fits and in others "persuasion" would be more appropriate.
There's a distinction between propaganda and storytelling, but it's not a large one.
Religion is not propaganda since most of its adherents want to believe.
Economics supports cultural tropes that life is hard, there's no free lunch, and scarcity is everywhere. This has its origins in our struggle for survival in the wilderness.
Economics in practice has ensured that life in modern civilization is harder than it needs to be, denies there are plenty of free lunches, and that some forms of scarcity are artificially maintained.
People don't have to be persuaded of cultural tropes. I've stated previously that some people are ill-suited for living in modern society. Their mindset remains rooted in surviving the harsh realities of the wilderness. They anticipate and expect the worse. If the worse does arrive, they're better suited to be among the survivors.
Economists are imprimateurs of a belief system. People who are guided by facts can see past the sciency mathematical smokescreen. This is not so much the art of persuasion, but of bafflement. Keep 'em baffled as you rob them blind.
Conversely, there are people who believe that civilization and technology can overcome all obstacles, ensuring a bright future for humanity without limit.
“ people who believe that civilization and technology can overcome all obstacles, ensuring a bright future for humanity without limit”
That would be me… :p
Provided a couple billion art degree holders are culled?
We have to stop creating them .. the existing ones will die off via natural causes…
Higher education is the culprit. No one completes high school with an art degree...
Post a Comment