I was going to write about Jamaica today but this topic emerged that I thought I should deal with before I write about the home of reggae. In fact, some of the material is input into a reasoned discussion about Jamaica so it logically precedes it. With the increasing profile of Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), social media activists are wont to talk about MMT in various ways that, in many cases, do not bear resemblance to our work. But that doesn’t stop them claiming things about what we have written or said and then proceeding to say how this is a ‘big problem’ with MMT that they cannot accept. Then their own local commentators chime in reinforcing the point. It is obvious that the original writer hasn’t read our work or if they have they haven’t grasped it (including the nuance and subtlety) but still feels privileged to hold themselves out as experts to wax lyrical about the technical flaws in the said work. This gets amplified by the responses from the readership who have probably read even less – to the point that we end up with MMT being constructed as something ridiculous and foreign to its original. Sort of like start by saying you are discussing 2, call it 3 and say it equals 4. It is a problem because it confounds people and also gives those who oppose our work ways to further misrepresent it in the public debate....This is an important post with many links to Bill's previous posts on the subject.
There are two considerations that Bill omits specific mention of in this post that are covered by his extensive critique of neoliberalism throughout his work.
The first is the imposition of neocolonialism, e.g, through the IMF. While Bill mention the IMF by name, he doesn't not mention colonialism, although Fadhel Kaboub does in post that Bill cites. Neoliberalism, neo-imperialism and neocolonialism are primary factors affecting development economics especially, and international trade as well.
The second is the use of economic warfare to impose neoliberalism and its correlates, neo-imperialism and neocolonialism, e.g., through economic sanctions and political means. International trade cannot be separated entirely from social and political factors, even though the economic aspects can be discussed independently as an exercise. But in the real world, many extra-economic factors supervene in the case of geopolitics and geostrategy, with international economic and financial policy having been weaponized by the US in particular.
While these non-economic factors are not specifically the concern of MMT, understanding of MMT can be useful in developing policy to counter neoliberal attack and hybrid warfare.
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
There is no internal MMT rift on trade or development
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia
See also
Bill Mitchell – billy blog
The mindless and myopic nature of neoliberalism
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia
2 comments:
The U.S. targets the old, the young, and the sick with its sanctions. Can you imagine needing a medicine to live? The death could be very painful. The U.S. elite are very spiteful and they should be put on trail for crimes against humanity..
The mindless and myopic nature of neoliberalism
“Fiscal austerity manifests in many ways, all of them unpleasant, destructive and unnecessary.”
Fiscal austerity is not unnecessary in euro-zone nations that have trade deficits. For those nations, austerity is inescapable since those nations must borrow all their money, and hence they go further and further into debt. Hence their governments have less and less money to spend on anything except debt payments. The result is automatic and inevitable austerity.
Regarding nations whose austerity is unnecessary and gratuitous, Bill Mitchell calls their austerity “mindless.” In reality, the purpose of gratuitous austerity is to force people to submit to mass privatization, and to rely on bank loans.
Jonathon Pie - The Gender Pay Gap
Excellent video. When someone whines about the “sex pay gap,” we find upon closer inspection that men and women are given the same pay when they do the exact same work under the exact same conditions with the exact same demands, duties, dangers, stresses, hours, and so on.
Feminists want to create a sex pay gap in which women are paid more than men for less work, or for less dangerous work, etc.
Society’s rulers lie about the “sex pay gap” so that employers have an excuse to pay male employees less (and ultimately pay female employees less as well).
The video makes the point that if employers could get away with paying women less for the exact same work, then employers would hire only women.
I might add that in growth industries (e.g. military contractors) most CEOs are now women. And that 65% of college students are now female.
And still we constantly hear about "male privilege."
Post a Comment