"crowding out investment"AlterNet
Paul Krugman Exposes GOP's Craven Hypocrisy on Deficits—and Why It Matters More Than Ever
Janet Allen
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.
WTF?! Russian Embassy in U.K. tweets Pepe meme, rambles about trust and allies https://t.co/dDFvc9eC2D
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) January 9, 2017
US Navy ship fired warning shots at Iranian boat or boats on Sunday near the Strait of Hormuz, US official says. https://t.co/hwIX2o7APE— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) January 9, 2017
US Navy proposes building 355 new ships - a potential boon for shipyards, but how many can US actually afford? https://t.co/5P7jtZOk2F— The Associated Press (@AP) January 8, 2017
The primary purpose of the declassified report, which offers no evidence to support its assertions that Russia hacked the U.S. presidential election campaign, is to discredit Donald Trump. I am not saying there was no Russian hack of John Podesta’s emails. I am saying we have yet to see any tangible proof to back up the accusation. This charge—Sen. John McCain has likened the alleged effort by Russia to an act of war—is the first salvo in what will be a relentless campaign by the Republican and Democratic establishment, along with its corporatist allies and the mass media, to destroy the credibility of the president-elect and prepare the way for impeachment.…
The second task of the report is to bolster the McCarthyist smear campaign against independent media, including Truthdig, as witting or unwitting agents of the Russian government.…
The final task of the report is to give the Democratic Party plausible cover for the catastrophic election defeat it suffered. Clinton initially blamed FBI Director James Comey for the loss before switching to the more easily demonized Putin. The charge of Russian interference essentially boils down to the absurd premise that perhaps hundreds of thousands of Clinton supporters suddenly decided to switch their votes to Trump when they read the leaked emails of Podesta. Either that or they tuned in to RT America and decided to vote for the Green Party.
The Democratic Party leadership cannot face, and certainly cannot publicly admit, that its callous betrayal of the working and middle class triggered a nationwide revolt that resulted in the election of Trump....Truthdig
Regular readers will know that I firmly supported the LEAVE vote in the British referendum in June 2016 even though that was somewhat gratuitous given I am neither a British citizen or live there. It was one of those academic exercises where we wax lyrical with little personal at stake. But that aside, if I had have been a British citizen then I would have voted to leave without doubt. The Internet links us more closely these days and in before the Referendum vote I received heaps of antagonist E-mails informing me that I was bereft of all credibility in taking that position. After the vote, when I dared to point out that the official (Bank of England, Treasury, IMF, OECD) and non-official predictions (the investment bankers etc – remember Credit Suisse sending out a Mayday alert of an impending recession which would wipe out 500,000 jobs!) were over the top to say the least (given the post-vote data), I was called delusional and worse. And these personal attacks came mostly from those who claim to be on the progressive side of the debate. Spare the thought! Subsequent data has indeed pointed out that none of the predictions of doom have so far turned out to be true. I know there might be longer term issues when they get onto working out the detail but I stand by my view – Brexit – if handled correctly by the British government will be a net benefit to the nation and its democracy. If not it could offer no real gains. But in this smokescreen of misinformation, a serious study from Cambridge University researchers – The macro-economic impact of Brexit – has concluded, that while there might be some short-run losses in GDP per capita, they soon recover as the British economy adjusts to its break from the dysfunctional European Union. There is no disaster scenario forthcoming!...Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Previous Congress added over $1 trillion to national debt over a decade. Will new Congress stop digging? https://t.co/pDHe47BqUv #fixthedebt pic.twitter.com/lgwZOFALs1— Fix the Debt (@FixtheDebt) January 8, 2017
This article discusses how I systematically generate the systems of equations that determines financial asset holdings within the Python sfc_models framework for Stock-Flow Consistent (SFC) models. It should be noted that despite the generality of the title, I am only discussing how I attacked the problem (the results of my technique is consistent with the literature that I have studied). The existing literature relies on the derivation of system equations by hand, and so the modelling techniques used by others are less constrained than the algorithmic equation generation I use.
(This article is technical, and aimed at those with an interest in SFC models, or more generally, an interest in how to set up a mathematical macro model. It will presumably make its way into an upcoming book on SFC modelling in Python.)
An issue that troubles me in relating Marx to Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is whether to apply the ‘productive/unproductive labor’ distinction to production that is monetized in a state money. Although I am not especially enamored of the distinction in general, it is particularly its application to public-sector activity in a state money system that strikes me as problematic. I ask the reader to countenance two propositions:heteconomistProposition 1. All public-sector labor in a state money system is productive.Proposition 2. Proposition 1, if true, would alter none of Marx’s central theoretical conclusions.If the following argument is mistaken, maybe someone can set me straight, and it will then be clearer how to proceed in future....
While Obamacare is unpopular, Medicare--i.e., single-payer socialism--is wildly popular. "Conservatives" want to protect it, not repeal it.
— Richard 🐸 Spencer (@RichardBSpencer) January 7, 2017
My prediction is that, after the dust settles, America will end up with a single-payer solution, pitched as "Medicare for all."
— Richard 🐸 Spencer (@RichardBSpencer) January 7, 2017
Now take a look at one of the “Judgments” from today’s disgraceful report:Ignore the terrible writing for a moment and focus instead on the curious last sentence. Why did the CIA and FBI have “HIGH” confidence while NSA is only at “MODERATE?” The answer is simple–there is no concrete evidence backing this up. It is nothing more than subjective judgment.
- We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.
When I was an analyst I had to be very clear in ensuring my reader (i.e., the President) would know what was a fact based on sources and what was a judgment or opinion. If you read through the entirety of this DNI Assessment you will not find one shred of actual evidence tying showing that Vladimir Putin “ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.” There is no evidence. That is why the entire report repeats the phrase, “WE ASSESS.” That is intel speak for opinion....No Quarter
The undisguised and clearly politically motivated report on the alleged 2016 US “election hack” displays a severe lack of “professional discipline” in the intelligence community, former NSA technical director and whistleblower William Edward Binney told RT.…
“Basically it means that our intelligence community has lost the professional discipline of an intelligence function. And this is very dangerous. That’s why I’m an advocate for what president-elect Trump is doing by challenging what they are saying, because they need to be challenged,” Binney told RT.
“Because they are not being professional and disciplined in what they’re doing. That’s why they can’t stop any of these terrorist attacks. They are really good, the FBI is anyway, in entrapping people but it’s not in stopping real attacks.”RT
William Binney (williambinney0802@comcast.net) worked for NSA for 36 years, retiring in 2001 as the technical director of world military and geopolitical analysis and reporting; he created many of the collection systems still used by NSA.
Ray McGovern (rrmcgovern@gmail.com) was a CIA analyst for 27 years; he briefed the president’s daily brief one-on-one to President Reagan’s most senior national security officials from 1981-85.
Repeating an accusation over and over again is not evidence that the accused is guilty, no matter how much “confidence” the accuser asserts about the conclusion. Nor is it evidence just to suggest that someone has a motive for doing something. Many conspiracy theories are built on the notion of “cui bono” – who benefits – without following up the supposed motive with facts.
But that is essentially what the U.S. intelligence community has done regarding the dangerous accusation that Russian President Vladimir Putin orchestrated a covert information campaign to influence the outcome of the Nov. 8 U.S. presidential election in favor of Republican Donald Trump.
Just a day after Director of National Intelligence James Clapper vowed to go to the greatest possible lengths to supply the public with the evidence behind the accusations, his office released a 25-page report that contained no direct evidence that Russia delivered hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta to WikiLeaks.
The DNI report amounted to a compendium of reasons to suspect that Russia was the source of the information – built largely on the argument that Russia had a motive for doing so because of its disdain for Democratic nominee Clinton and the potential for friendlier relations with Republican nominee Trump.
But the case, as presented, is one-sided and lacks any actual proof. Further, the continued use of the word “assesses” – as in the U.S. intelligence community “assesses” that Russia is guilty – suggests that the underlying classified information also may be less than conclusive because, in intelligence-world-speak, “assesses” often means “guesses.”Consortium News
Nowadays, enormous amounts of information reach people. Most of it passes through very few channels. The mainstream media dominate the public debate, sow confusion and propagate disinformation. Unfortunately, the situation is hardly better on the other side. Many leftist intellectuals love talking about big goals, but they hate the discussions about the way to get there.flassbeck economics international
Older Americans are retiring in droves https://t.co/17a431wE4b via @LJKawa pic.twitter.com/4CcHVUxx3H— Bloomberg Markets (@markets) January 6, 2017
Disclosures through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident forgeries.Significantly, this is contrary to the claims of the Clinton campaign and principal spokespeople.
The farce is complete.Zero Hedge
I am referring to Jim Clapper and John Brennan. They are proven liars.…No Quarter
When you have immoral, corrupt leaders like Clapper and Brennan sitting at the top of the chain of command in the intelligence community, you should not be surprised when the personnel start reflecting those same values. The so-called “revelations” about alleged Russian hacking of the 2016 Presidential election must be taken with a grain of salt. How can you tell the report is not true? It is leaked to NBC and the Washington Post while John Brennan refused to brief the House Intelligence Committee. Got that?….
In an interview with the New York Times this morning, Trump called the investigation of the Russia hack “a witch hunt.” That’s the same phrase used this morning by Russia Today, aka RT, a Russian state propaganda organ.
It’s no coincidence that Trump and the Russian government are using the exact same new talking point at the exact same moment in time. Either Trump’s team coordinated with the Russians, or at the very least, Trump saw the Russian report and decided to parrot it.
Which raises the question of why Team Trump continues to use Russian government sources to inform their campaign and now transition. This isn’t the first time that Team Trump has been caught using Russian talking points.The narrative on the left that Trump is PUtin's stooge, or at least they are coordinating.
In late December, the US-based cybersecurity technology company CrowdStrike claimed that Russian intelligence infected an application used by Ukrainian forces to speed up howitzer fire with trojan malware between 2014 and 2016, covering the span of the conflict in eastern Ukraine. The firm, which has a history of accusing Russia of various hacking operations such as the recent compromising US Democratic Party leak, claimed that the cyberattack resulted in as much as 80 percent of Ukraine's howitzers being disabled.Crowdstrike narrative falling apart? This was supposedly key "evidence" of Russia's involvement in the DNC "hack" through the use of the same software."Due to various media reports that 80 percent of Ukrainian D-30 howitzers had been destroyed by a Russian hacker cyberattack, the army command of Ukraine's armed forces states that the given information is not true," the ministry said in a statement....
"I am asking the chairs of the House and Senate committees to investigate top secret intelligence shared with NBC prior to me seeing it," Trump said in a post on Twitter.Politicizing intelligence undermines the credibility of the intelligence services.
President-elect Donald Trump dismissed a controversy over Russian hacking during the 2016 U.S. election campaign as a "political witch hunt," the New York Times reported on Friday before U.S. intelligence agencies were to brief him on the matter.Trump calls Russian hacking controversy a 'witch hunt': NYT
President-elect Donald Trump, who insulted rivals during his 2016 campaign with nicknames such as "Crooked Hillary" and "Little Marco," has a new nemesis: U.S. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, a man he derides as a "clown."ROFLMAO.
Much of America’s recent demonization of Russia relates to deep cultural and even religious differences between the two countries, requiring a deeper understanding of the other’s strengths and weaknesses, writes Paul Grenier.Consortium News
“Quiet fruitfulness. The born aristocrats of the spirit are not overeager; their creations blossom and fall from the trees on a quiet autumn evening, being neither rashly desired, not hastened on, nor supplanted by new things. The wish to create incessantly is vulgar, betraying jealousy, envy, and ambition. If one is something, one does not actually need to do anything—and nevertheless does a great deal. There is a type higher than the “productive” man.” (Friedrich Nietzsche)Economic Sociology and Political Economy
Social Physics is not a new idea. Auguste Comte, the founder of modern sociology, coined the phrase back in the 19th century. Comte and his crew aspired to explain social reality by developing a set of universal laws—the sociological equivalent of physicists’ quest to create a theory of everything. As with economics, that kind of physics envy has proved largely delusional. Now though, Pentland argues that the arrival of Big Data means we can aspire to a ‘thermodynamics of society’, where behaviour is governed by discernible mathematical laws. It does not deny free will – Pentland does not claim to be able to predict individual behaviour, but finds a high degree of certainty in mass behaviours, which appear to follow particular patterns (like atoms in a gas).
Big Data allows us to move from describing society in terms of stocks (equilibria, population, education and health status) to real time flows (of information, ideas, contacts) and this transforms are ability both to understand and accelerate human progress.
The two most important concepts in SP are
- Idea flow within social networks, and how it can be separated into exploration (finding new ideas/strategies) and engagement (getting everyone to coordinate their behaviour)
- Social learning, which is how new ideas become habits, and how learning can be accelerated and shaped by social pressure...