Based on a thing out of The Mail so buyer beware. I don't see any reason to celebrate any of this. Laffer's "MMT credentials" seem lackluster at best. Moore is a "free markets!" fundamentalist. Rudy was certainly a competent administrator. "Bookie of Virtue" Bennett a conservative Catholic social issues critic.
Doesn't add up.
Giuliani's name isn't the only one in play. Trump council of wise men,' include Laffer, Moore, Giuliani & Bennett https://t.co/xd5FsbUCjQ— slone (@slone) February 23, 2016
Trump will never take Moore. He mocked The Club for Growth royally when they tried to hit him up for a $1 million donation. Giuliani and (especially) Laffer are problematic.
ReplyDeleteRight forgot about that Mike ... illustrates further the poor reporting out of the Mail here...
ReplyDeleteI'd say there is a real vacuum currently as far as a "Trump Cabinet"... or at least there is nothing visible in the media anyways... The Rudy part might be true... havent seen Laffer wrt Trump either...
The only guy I hear Trump mention over and over and over is Icahn.
ReplyDeleteIt's far to early to get an accurate assessment of his cabinet. Those getting the nod will have to have an articulated record of being philosophically in tune with Trump's stated objectives. Pretty much eliminates neocons and neoliberals we're all familiar with.
ReplyDeleteMight eliminate everybody then....
ReplyDeleteMatt, who on earth did you think would be in his cabinet? The UMKC economics department? To be fair to Trump, he hasn't really hidden who he thinks needs to run America: Icahn, Kravis and other corporate raiders.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in another thread, why Trump is given on a pass on one of the leading (perhaps the leading) MMT blog is a mystery. If anyone else said the US is "Greece on steroids" and the "unemployment rate is 42%" or propounded any of his fiscally conservative policies, you'd rightly rip out his throat.
In any case, MRW, following Slansky, pointed out that if you want to destroy the GOP, support Trump. I support Trump! A pity there isn't someone who'll destroy the Democrats.
John NOBODY listens to MMT... hate to break the news to you...
ReplyDeleteWe dont give Trump a pass as far as his knowledge of currency systems or Bernie for that matter...
All I try to do is analyze all of these morons and their potential actions from our perspective...
This will be a major problem for Trump going forward. He says he wants to run government like a business but bureaucracies don't function that way, and certainly neither does government in general at the national level. Putting corporate types throughout his cabinet will backfire spectacularly. These type of personalities might work where trade and foreign policy are concerned, but then again the fact that Trump is going against the grain to the extent that he is I have serious doubts he could make things work any better than they are now. He needs to articulate who helped shape the ideas that came before him.
ReplyDeleteThere has to be a myriad of people that influenced his philosophy. Name them, Mr Trump.
Malmo, all very good points.
ReplyDelete"There has to be a myriad of people that influenced his philosophy. Name them, Mr Trump."
Well, he does claim his favourite book is "The Bible". Obviously a lie, but the religious right go wet over lies, the bigger the more climactic the orgasm. But it does seem to be impossible to figure out what or who are his Intellectual influences.
He was a liberal democrat until recently. He may well still be and, knowing he'd never get the Democratic nomination, has gone all wacko (Cruz and Rubio aren't Americans now) in trying to get the GOP nomination. He may turn out to be a pragmatic centrist, like he probably is in business.
Matt, fair enough - nobody listens to MMT. But then again, do they really have to? Traditional Keynesian policies would go a long way in pulling working America out of the hole it's in. They may not be perfect, but the stuff Robert Eisner, JK and James Galbraith, even Stiglitz and Reich, push would help a huge chunk of the working (and unemployed) poor.
Traditional Keynesianism isn't perfect, but needs must when the devil drives.
"Traditional Keynesian policies would go a long way"
ReplyDeleteYes they would, demonstrating the following words: "the poor you will always be having..." 100% absolute truth...
John, read Pat Buchanan’s latest piece: "Nationalism and Populism Propel Trump.” Makes excellent points.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.unz.com/pbuchanan/nationalism-and-populism-propel-trump/
It's out of our hands, John. Trump, Sanders, Hillary, Cruz, Rubio - the choices being offered are... not good.
ReplyDeleteMore insanity:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/02/23/here-s-how-michael-bloomberg-becomes-president.html
Bob, I think Buchanan is right. It’s not about voting in a good choice. It’s about the message Trump is delivering from the people to the establishment: "We want an end to your policies and we want an end to you."
ReplyDelete"More insanity:” No shit.
ReplyDeleteMRW, Exactly. A vote for Trump for many is a vote against the establishment. The details for many aren't as important as the general message to kick the crooked bums out and replace them with a perceived "outsider".
ReplyDeleteNot just Trump but Bernie, too.
ReplyDeleteHowever, even if Trump or Bernie would win, this is not going to be a wave election in that it isn't being reflected at the state level where corporate cash still heavily dominates. So if either win, there is a likelihood of a Jesse Ventura effect.
This is perhaps more the case with Trump, since Bernie knows how the game is play and Trump is a newbie (think steep learning curve even if he is a quick study). A barrage of cash will flow through K Street to the opposition.
Liberals, conservatives, libertarians and even many moderates can't stand the political class as comprised. Together they make up the vast majority of voters. The question is, what outsider can untie the disparate groups the best? That's why vice president will play a big role in the election too.
ReplyDeleteI think P. Buchanan is correct, will the establishment take heed and try to modify their message?
ReplyDeleteI have difficulty seeing Sanders as an outsider or leader of a revolution. Despite his socialist label, he's a Dem party loyalist.
Yeah, a perceived “outsider” who has the establishment reaching for the Charmin. The venom on both sides is remarkable, from offended Republicans to sanctimonious Progressives. Even more remarkable is that they blame Trump. As if all the people supporting him don’t have legitimate gripes, therefore they are not allowed to have someone speak for them. And brashly. I also wonder at the remarkable hauteur emanating from NYC elites (my former stomping grounds) who think that withering remarks will convince these know-nothings to go back to sleep. Sneering at the hoi polloi isn’t going to work.
ReplyDeleteAgree with you, Bob. And the Ventura analogy is apt, Tom.
ReplyDeleteI meant to write, "Sneering at the hoi polloi by going after, or denigrating, Trump isn’t going to work.” Americans are mad enough to say, Who the hell are you telling me what I should care about? And Bloomberg? He has bats in the belfry if he thinks he can make a dent. A nanny president? Please.
ReplyDelete"Despite his socialist label, he's a Dem party loyalist.”
ReplyDeleteWell, he’s one note. He embraced some of the MMT ideas because they fit his ideas, but he has no clue how it really works, or he would be educating people now about how the federal government can pay for tuition and health care without invoking taxes. I didn’t realize he was just whistling through the stadium until I heard him say a few weeks ago that he would continue Obama’s stance on Russia.
The one--I mean, one--item that a US president has absolute dominion over as Head of State is foreign affairs. The sanctions against Russia, if Sanders understood MMT, are a violation of the international agreements in place for a century that give foreign govt depositors dominion over their sovereign accounts at the Fed. Yeah, mission creep started breaking those down from the time of Reagan, who ushered in financial warfare on a big scale with the USSR, but it doesn’t make them less inviolable.
. . . . and it breeds global anger and contempt.
ReplyDeleteMRW, Your comment @ 2:15 PM could not be more correct. The elites of all stripes can go straight to hell.
ReplyDeleteMatt: "the poor you will always be having..."
ReplyDeleteAnd MMT would get rid of the poor? Hardly.
As Randy Wray emphasises, in a capitalist economy a JG and any other number of MMT policies would not be enough. A social democratic welfare system would be necessary to eliminate poverty and other social maladies. MMT is for Austrians too, and they couldn't care less about social contracts.
John, jobs eliminate poverty, and attendant social maladies.
ReplyDelete"And MMT would get rid of the poor? Hardly. "
ReplyDeleteWell maybe not "MMT" but if we define 'poor' as 'lacking means of subsistence' then at least the knowledge (and this knowledge IS somewhat 'within' MMT...) that we CAN issue 'debt free' currency would create conditions where it would be technically possible to eliminate those 'lacking means of subsistence' among us... we COULD 'get rid of the poor' iow we could impose policy under which NO ONE would be lacking means of subsistence...with that knowledge.....
OTOH its NOT technically possible under metals or 'debt based money!" ... cant happen hence the accuracy of the Lord's message to his Israelite disciples that THEY would always have 'poor' among them...
As long as we use a "money!" system where it is 'debt based' or otherwise the establishment of "money!" is subject to some form of terms which can be defaulted upon it is IMPOSSIBLE to eliminate all those made 'poor' among us... even if we are achieving a surplus society as manifestly have been for thousands of years...
Establishing a surplus in REAL terms manifestly DOESNT MATTER we have had surplus for thousands of years... our problems are manifestly NOT in the real terms... as far as eliminating those made poor among us... the problems are with a lack of knowledge concerning matters economic/financial....
"social contracts"
ReplyDeleteAs long as it is viewed as a "contract" iow there are terms established, ie terms of default, it'll never happen...
Trump the other day:
"Pelley: Universal health care.
Trump: I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.
Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?
Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably—
Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?
Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it."
He is getting VEEEEERRRRRRYYY close here imo.... still lacking a complete understanding though for sure ... still lacking the technical knowledge necessary to pull it off....
Matt: "OTOH its NOT technically possible under metals or 'debt based money!" ... cant happen hence the accuracy of the Lord's message to his Israelite disciples that THEY would always have 'poor' among them..."
ReplyDeleteThere are times when I think you're a goddamn genius! I do disagree with you strongly at times (sometimes wanting to punch me computer), but, hot diggity dog, Matt, that is just about the most inspired explanation of Jesus being an MMTer!!!!!
Matt: "...the problems are with a lack of knowledge concerning matters economic/financial...."
No, the problems are political and the imbalance in power created by those with the money.
John (to me) that is the lesson of that scripture... iow its certainly not about "charity" or something... He's pointing out the inadequacy of the Israelite system to consistently deliver in material terms...
ReplyDelete"the problems are political" well that is related to economics or "house law" it is via the political process that we establish the laws...
Matt, but has anyone else made that argument?
ReplyDeleteLeave aside everything else, what you've pointed out has extremely interesting theological implications. Has any one of the many Christian churches ever made that point? I can't remember anybody in the Anglican Church, of which I was a member for many years, saying anything remotely like it. All that was banged into your head was the poor will always be with you, and so be charitable.
Matt: "...that is related to economics or "house law" it is via the political process that we establish the laws..."
ReplyDeleteThose with the money and therefore the power shape the laws, the politics, knowledge and culture. Comes down to money, always has. The Amazing Randy's right more than he knows when he claims it's all about money!
Well John I get it from Paul's letters and the 'gospels' not from any Church type thing... (never had an original idea in my life...)
ReplyDeleteI think you have to have a good understanding of currency systems in order to understand a lot of what is written in the 'gospels'... there is a lot of contrast illustrated via the two different systems (Israelite system vs the Roman system) operating in amongst each other to demonstrate the difference between a system relying on "works" ('debt based money' ie Israelite system which came with terms) vs the system relying on "grace" (ie 'unmerited favor', keyword here being 'unmerited' ie NO terms ie 'issued money') which went on to become Paul's new message for we of the nations separate from Israel...
Sometimes the scriptures will use the metal names (argurion for silver) and other times the scriptures use the numismatic names (drachma, denarii, etc...) its important to realize these differences in order to understand the scripture...
Like the 'good Samaritan' left a few denarii to pay for the care of the waylayed traveler for a few days while it says about Judas "they WEIGH for him 30 pieces of silver..."
Samaritan used issued state currency while Judas used mass measures of silver... etc...
Paul wrote to Timothy "for fondness for SILVER is A root of all the evils..." (NOT "love of money!")
These are important nuances in the scriptures that few are given to understand currently... Christendom is caught up by the metonymy of the word "money!" like it is one big thing...