I've looked around the internet and Yanis Varoufakis does appear to endorce MMT, but he has concerns that the bankers will abuse it, adding that this is why they are so enthusiastic about it. He also says it can be used used for investment and to create jobs. But I will agree, he doesn't seem to be all that excited about it.
I've put this up for discussion. Thoughts below please.
Yanis Varoufakis on MMT
6 comments:
Now that he believes that social democracy is dead; this leaves no role for MMT informed policies.
I get what you mean now, but he probably thinks that socialism is the way now, but a massive section of the population doesn't support it. Not yet, anyway.
A large section of the population doesn't support socialism, especially much of the working class, but they have the most to gain from the welfare state, so why don't they support it? It maybe because their wages are low and they have to work hard in grotty jobs, so they are resentful of people on welfare. The Conservatives seem to win by default. It's crazy!
The socialists have been dumbfounded for years why they don't get more support. Yanis Varoufakis, like many socialists, probably believe they can win the argument, but the working class, and many in the middleclass, work extremely hard in difficult jobs and this fuels resentment of those on benefits. Many people would benefit from more employee friendly policies, a better safety net, and better state health care, so it's a matter of getting the message across, except most of the media is conservative leaning. This is the impasse we have always been stuck in. I know that many left leaning social scientists are working on this.
The welfare state, or social safety net, is part of a mixed economy. This has little to do with socialism, where there would be no unemployment.
Was the USSR a welfare state?
No!
If a percentage of the labour force is on welfare, is that a class division?
Yes!
And class divisions can breed resentment.
Being on welfare because of unemployment would be a thing of the past if there were a job guarantee or a socialist economy. There would still be disabled people on welfare, however.
Social democracy addresses the problems of a mixed economy, which we call capitalism. A JG would be part of SOCDEM but it also has a theoretical element, which challenges the employment/inflation tradeoff described by the Phillips curve. If the electorate understood this, then a JG would not be seen strictly as part of the social safety net. A JG is not a welfare program, it is a macroeconomic stabilizer!
Yanis believes we have entered techno-feudalism. Social democracy wasn't set up to deal with the problems of techno-feudalism. It would no longer be a viable political movement. The social safety net comes from political/labour struggles.
The implications of a bio-security state, or social credit system, are topics he barely touched upon in his more recent interview.
The socialists have been dumbfounded for years why they don't get more support.
Rather they have been found to be dumb by failing to realize that people want a just economic system - neither fascism nor socialism.
And where are the basics of a just economic system to be found? In the Old Testament, of course.
Post a Comment