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.
You don’t need to be a quant to work out this equation. The federal government should just put people to work doing the jobs that desperately need to get done. You don’t have to worry about how to pay them, because you print money. therealheisenberg
Then
Instead, they spend their days explaining to everyone else why something like, say, a federal jobs guarantee isn’t a viable proposition. therealheisenberg
This is bait and switch since it conflates needed infrastructure and other spending (with an emphasis on accomplishing work) with a job guarantee (with an emphasis on providing "employment").
Only looks like a bait and switch if you are insane.
needed infrastructure and other spending (with an emphasis on accomplishing work) Yes. This is doing stuff that needs to be done. (by people)
a job guarantee (with an emphasis on providing "employment"). This is doing stuff, by people, that needs to be done.
They're the same thing.
Stuff is done by the doing of stuff. People do stuff for you if you do stuff for them. That is the entire meaning and import of the Job Guarantee. It cannot be said enough that people who oppose a job guarantee are literally insane.
The AA's of the world are completely insane in their not-conflating of the absolutely identical, identical by definition. They are like a Spanish Inquisition of Idiots, that roots out the heretics who believe the heresy 2 + 2 = 4, rather than the One True Truth that 2 + 2 = 4.
And of course the worst of the heretics are those who conflate the diabolical heresy of 2 + 2 = 4, with the sacred truth of 2 + 2 = 4.
It's more the Big Idiocy than the Big Lie. People think there must be something to the idiocy, because nobody could be that stupid. Let me break it to y'all. People, you, me and everybody, can be and are that stupid. True learning = learning how stupid and insane you have been.
5 comments:
You don’t need to be a quant to work out this equation. The federal government should just put people to work doing the jobs that desperately need to get done. You don’t have to worry about how to pay them, because you print money. therealheisenberg
Then
Instead, they spend their days explaining to everyone else why something like, say, a federal jobs guarantee isn’t a viable proposition. therealheisenberg
This is bait and switch since it conflates needed infrastructure and other spending (with an emphasis on accomplishing work) with a job guarantee (with an emphasis on providing "employment").
Only looks like a bait and switch if you are insane.
needed infrastructure and other spending (with an emphasis on accomplishing work)
Yes. This is doing stuff that needs to be done. (by people)
a job guarantee (with an emphasis on providing "employment").
This is doing stuff, by people, that needs to be done.
They're the same thing.
Stuff is done by the doing of stuff. People do stuff for you if you do stuff for them. That is the entire meaning and import of the Job Guarantee. It cannot be said enough that people who oppose a job guarantee are literally insane.
The AA's of the world are completely insane in their not-conflating of the absolutely identical, identical by definition. They are like a Spanish Inquisition of Idiots, that roots out the heretics who believe the heresy 2 + 2 = 4, rather than the One True Truth that 2 + 2 = 4.
And of course the worst of the heretics are those who conflate the diabolical heresy of 2 + 2 = 4, with the sacred truth of 2 + 2 = 4.
It's more the Big Idiocy than the Big Lie. People think there must be something to the idiocy, because nobody could be that stupid. Let me break it to y'all. People, you, me and everybody, can be and are that stupid. True learning = learning how stupid and insane you have been.
“the diabolical heresy of 2 + 2 = 4”
Thats not diabolical... what would be diabolical would be to start a dialog against that theses with an antithesis that 2+2=5...
2+2=4 is taught didactically... not reasoned back and forth in dialog diabolically ...
Everyone knows that 2 + 2 = 22
In Matt's post above be used 8 Greek words:
diabolical
heresy
dialog
theses
antithesis
didactically
is
in
Matt is either well-educated, crypto Greek... or both :)
Thats not diabolical... what would be diabolical would be to start a dialog against that theses with an antithesis that 2+2=5...
2+2=4 is taught didactically... not reasoned back and forth in dialog diabolically ...
Post a Comment