Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Connecting the dots about Libertarianism-Anarchism

Hint — one of the problems stems from economic rent

Read the post at Angry Bear
A Though Experiment: What Would a Perfect Libertarian State Look Like a Hundred Years Later?
by Mike Kimel
(h/t Kevin Fathi)


googleheim said...

Libertarianism quickly dissolves itself into a routing for those who have acculmulatd a lot to simply detach and only support the protection of their wealth.

In the long side history of Argentina, you can see how what was once the richest country per capita in the world became obsessed when the ruling 10,000 families stopped investing in their country and sought only to contain their wealth and cut off any sort of churning of economic ecologies. They lapsed into war among themselves.

Thomas Jefferson may have said we need a revolution every 10 years but Libertarianism chokes off the revolution when it will not embrace it since it will be among those who are poor and working sideways, laterally with the horizontal flow of information and not vertical Hitler stagnation.

Congress people and senators who have been re-elected countless times similarly cut off the revolutionary spirit of the USA.

They simply cannot accept that the 99% have something in common that they do not.

Libertarians are also just ugly dorky Republicans, too square to fit in at the "I'm rich you aint'" clubs.

Shaun Hingston said...

People need to be-careful about interpreting the word Anarchist. There are two ideologically opposed types: C-Anarchy & S-Anarchy.

C-Anarchy is based on the idea that strong property rights reign supreme, everyone has guns which forces everyone to act peacefully.... Basically it's capitalism without Government, or what we had before democracy.

S-Anarchy is a bit harder to define, but I would characterize it as utopian socialism. The idea is that there are no coercive relationships. Depending on who you talk to, then this gives groups the 'right' into intervene/interfere with another group if the first believes that there is evidence of a coercive relationship. The idea of 'coercive' is subjective, which is acknowledged by S-Anarchists, but state that this is a fact of life, like all definitions.

C-Anarchy --> Capitalist Anarchist.
S-Anarchy --> Socialist Anarchist.

Historically speaking, the word Anarchy was first used to define S-Anarchy, but it seems later capitalism effectively hijacked the word and redefined it.

Shaun Hingston said...

Another MMT mind bug.

Why do most MMTers dismiss the notion of 'means of exchange'? The MMT line is that money is a creature of the state. I think that this is inadequate.

What about gold? What about time-sharing systems existing within a normal economy? I think that "means of economic information exchange" should be the correct term. All 'money things' fall into the superset defined by 'economic information exchange'.

Means of Economic Information Exchange

What is it? Any token-system that facilitates the flow of economic information, and can be used to make economic decisions(i.e transactions).

What is a token-system? From an MMT perspective it is defined by everything that is involved in the flow of tokens between economic participants. So that would mean Consolidated Govt. Sector, markets and the 'money supply'. If we are talking about gold, then it really only means the physical gold, markets, and the 'natural sources' of gold.

What makes one token-system better than another?
This is defined by its ability to transfer economic information between participants. This is in both quality & quantity.

Why is state money better than gold?
Generally speaking, it is easier to transfer economic information, it can be manipulated in such a way that maintains reasonably stable prices, prices in a state money system are more indicative of participants wants and desires than those participating in a gold system.

Right, so your saying that it all comes down to a token-system's ability to transfer economic information. Why don't people start up their own currencies?
Token systems transmit the wants and desires of individuals to each other. The overall strength of a token-system is determined by its ability to statisfy wants and desires against the external world. There are individuals within each token system that can manipulate prices greater than others. They may have this power legitimately or not. If adversaries are able to influence the system enough, then they can distort prices enough to obtain more of what they desire. If another token-system is created, then it will most likely threaten this position of privilege. Therefore adversaries will respond in such a way to manipulate prices so that the new currency is threatened. This is generally the reason why new currencies have a difficult time establishing themselves.

Why do you think this is more consistent with empirical observations?
According to the MMT definition of State Money, then a lot of items currently being used to facilitate economic information exchange would be excluded, for no reason. For example, there are time-banks being used in parts of the world, but they are not subject to taxation, or spent into existence like MMT defined currency, so what are they? But what they do facilitate is the exchange of needs & desires between individuals.

What do you define as the optimum?
The ultimate economic output that can be possibly achieved will occur when a token-system most accurately reflects the wants and desires of economic participants.... This would be the hypothetical situation of when everyone can simultaneously communicate with each other, everywhere. It is meant to indicate what is the 'optimum state', not what is actually meant to happen, but what possible token-systems should be measured against.

googleheim said...

Could the EU problem be staged by EU to try to dissuage a war on Iran ? i.e. counter measure in that Europe will trash it's derivative markets in an effort to stop US invasion of Iran ?

or is EU just as ready to war as the rest ?

Shaun Hingston said...

Time for a new kind of money

Since I have ‘joined’ the MMT community, I have watched as MMT has discussed headlines and challenged the contempory economic thought. But one thing has frustrated me, the lack of creativity. As the world plunges into chaos I am surprised by the lack of creative solutions offered by the MMT community. This to me is an opportune time for MMT to show the world an alternative to the current arrangement.

As stated earlier I have argued that token-system is best able to transfer the needs and desires of participants will prevail. This in itself is something that can be offered to the OWS protestors.

I suggest that MMTers work towards a new token-system that can be offered to OWS protestors as a way for them to exchange their needs and desires. Ultimately I think that this system will either force the current system to reform itself to survive or will become inferior.

What is needed?

– A system to transmit tokens.
– A system that manages the creation of tokens.
– A system that facilitates the exchange of prices.
– A system that measures the needs & wants of individuals.

Why will it work?

Because it will transmit needs & wants better than the current system. There are many different strategies to gain acceptance. A pool of donations could be used to support an exchange rate for the token-system. This will give the token system some underlying support while it gains acceptance. A job guarantee like system could be used initially to disburse initial funds into the economy. This could be used to coordinate the efforts of OWS. Sooner or later businesses will start to see the participants of the OWS as a labour force. They will then start to purchase tokens, which will create a pseudo-permanent state of support for the currency.

At this point, it is likely that the supply of tokens will need to be inflated. This situation is good for everyone. People participating within the OWS will start to gain jobs, the current lack of expansion in money supply of U.S.D would be somewhat offset by the expansion of the OWS token-system.

The token-system will then most likely start to become threatened by those with a vested interest of the U.S.D. The will need to increase spending in order to support their attack on the token-system or to encourage businesses to use U.S.D. Either way even if the token-system is defeated, unemployment will be fixed. There will be a population of individuals educated in MMT, and this group will act as an inoculation against any attempts by powerful morons to drive up unemployment.

Consequently it will be imperative that legislation be changed to allow, groups within the U.S.A to create their own free-floating currencies.

Immediate Suggestions

-Warren, Mike, Bill, and anyone else, should immediately issue 10,000 tokens and disburse them into the OWS movement. At the same time, they should offer at some cost to be paided in those credits, the opportunity for OWS to post on their blogs.

-Then, the Job Guarantee could be formed by paying those OWS participants that promote verifiable material that promotes the MMT agenda.

-After a series of donations have been collected, this could be used to fund a lottery/payment of which tickets can only be purchased using the OWS credits.

Joe Cicirell said...

I used to smile and ignore these folks, and never knew much about them. It never seemed to be a significant political movement to me.

What a mistake. These folks are serious, and have moved in large numbers to NH to take part in the Free State Project. They have been very effective at influencing state government and continue to drive a very extreme agenda. Here's the founder of this project, Jason Sorens, in his own words:

"Once we've taken over the state government, we can slash state and local budgets, which make up a sizeable proportion of the tax and regulatory burden we face every day. Furthermore, we can eliminate substantial federal interference by refusing to take highway funds and the strings attached to them. Once we've accomplished these things, we can bargain with the national government over reducing the role of the national government in our state. We can use the threat of secession as leverage to do this."


Matt Franko said...

We apparently once knew these things:



Tom Hickey said...

I promoted Shaun's comments on money as information to a post. Please comment on this in that thread.