David Bollier — Why Do Some Software Commons Succeed and Others Fail?

Schweik and English conclude that FLOSS commons will be more successful when:

• The project has a relatively clearly defined vision and a mechanism to communicate the vision early in the project’s life, before getting to the growth stage;
• The software produced has a higher utility as perceived by the end user community; 
• The project has one or more leaders who generate excitement and demonstrate “through doing.”
• The project has well-articulated and clear goals established by the project leader(s).

Schweik and English found no support for the hypotheses that projects succeed because they add functionality to core FLOSS technologies; because they are components of a computer operating system or other foundational infrastructure; or because they are built on certain programming languages that are popular in developer circles.

What’s particularly impressive about Internet Success is the painstaking rigor of the data collection and its use of sophisticated statistical and social science methodologies. This book is no anecdotal, conjectural account of why and how software commons function. It bores deeply into the social phenomena of software commons by studying a large, representative sample of projects. (Full disclosure: Schweik is a friend and I provided a blurb for the book jacket.)

Read it at David Bollier's Blog
Why Do Some Software Commons Succeed and Others Fail?
by David Bollier

Nick Rowe — How many monetary transmission mechanisms are there?

Read it at Worthwhile Canadian Initiative
How many monetary transmission mechanisms are there?
by Nick Rowe

The ever-resourceful Nick invites us to think about monetary transmission mechanisms, and he suggests that there may be many.

You want concrete steps? I will give you a million different flights of concrete steps.

For example, like Lars Christensen, lets talk about the monetary transmission mechanism where the central bank adjusts the stock price index, rather than a short term nominal interest rate. No zero lower bound problem there.

In case no one has noticed, the Fed is already fixing the stock price index through QE. Indeed, a Fed official admitted that asset prices are higher than they would be otherwise, and it is clear that this is policy objective to increase the "wealth effect." Markets have already priced in QE3 to a degree, and if it is not forthcoming, then eventually this expectation will be discounted.

Scott Fullwiler on negative nominal rate

Negative nominal rates can 'work' if cb/govt announces neg rate & buys loans; & it's a partial debt jubilee 4 refinancers via fiscal policy

Scott Fullwiler ‏@stf18 via Twitter

UPDATE from the comments

STF said...The point being that if the CB/Govt holds the negative rate assets, then you don't get all the potential problems of the banking sector and money markets trying to deal with negative rates on their asset side, or excess reserve taxes, etc. And the lost equity for the lender of a negative rate loan comes out of the govt, not the private sector. Hard to put all that into 140 characters on Twitter!

Chris Dillow — The State & Growth

This is the social democratic conception of the state - that it should help promote individuals' flourishing. To which the Marxist replies: It ain't gonna happen, chumm 

This is because, to Marxists, the principal function of the state is not to promote human thriving, except as a by-product.... 

Now, one criticism of the Marxist view is that it is not falsifiable. If the state pursues growth-friendly policies, we say it is pursuing its accumulation function, and if it doesother things we say it's pursuing the legitimation function. We win each way.

In this context, though, this criticism is wrong. If the state were to introduce a citizens' basic income - sufficiently high and unconditional to permit more people to downsize to what Skidelsky calls "simpler, less acquisitive modes of living" - then the Marxist view of the state would be falsified.
My suspicion is that this won't happen because Marxists are right.

Read it at Stumbling and Mumbling
The State & Growth
by Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle

Simon Wren-Lewis issues a put-up-or-shut-up challenge to heterodoxy

For heterodox economists

Read it at mainly macro
Can heterodox economists constructively engage the mainstream?
by Simon Wren-Lewis

Kevin Allen — How Language Shapes Your Organization

Cultural permission is the tone, attitude and language that emanates from the executive suite. It is a mantra, expressed in oft-used catch phrases and philosophies that move like waves through the organization. They get adopted and interpreted as actions to be followed. They become part of everyday lexicon and cultural idioms that people hear coming from the highest levels, and form a platform for what the organization believes and expects of its people. "Get it done!" "We will not be denied." "Take no prisoners!" These are just a few of the things I heard coming up in the business world, and from my perspective, no good came from any of them.

Read it at The Harvard Business Review | HBR Blog Network
How Language Shapes Your Organization
by Kevin Allen

Jack Balkin — The Dangerous Thirteenth Amendment

Sandy Levinson and I have posted our latest article, The Dangerous Thirteenth Amendment, on SSRN. The essay is part of a symposium on the Thirteenth Amendment organized by Alex Tsesis, and will appear in the Columbia Law Review later this year. Here is the abstract:

Read it at Balkinization
The Dangerous Thirteenth Amendment
by Jack Balkin | Knight Professor of Constitutional Law and the First Amendment, Yale Law School

Tanweer Akram — Money Matters, Ultra-Low Long-Term Interest Rates and Feeble Growth

MMT is catching on more widely. Check out the references at the end of the article.

Read it at ING Market Perspectives | Market Insight
Money Matters, Ultra-Low Long-Term Interest Rates and Feeble Growth
by Tanweer Akram, PhD | Senior Economist, Global Rates
(h/t Scott Fullwiler via Twitter)

John G. Taft — How Finance Is Like Alcoholism

The core principal of Stewardship—serving others by responsibly managing what they have entrusted to our care—represents the code that should govern and inspire and inform the financial services industry. In our industry, it’s known as putting clients first. There’s lots of lip service being paid to “client first” principles right now. But the jury’s still out on whether those principles will get translated into responsible behavior.

In the meantime… get ready for yet more stuff to come crashing through the windshield.

Read it at CNBC NetNet (short)
Crashing Through the Windshield: How Finance Is Like Alcoholism
by John G. Taft | CEO, RBC Wealth Management - U.S.

Bill Mitchell — Another macroeconomist who is blind

Bill explains the different varieties of "Keynesianism," and how many of their proponents don't understand modern monetary operations.

Read it at Bill Mitchell — billy blog

Another macroeconomist who is blind

by Bill Mitchell

Who First Warned About The Euro? The WSJ Weighs-In

Who are the five? Oh, my goodness it is Bell [now Kelton], Mosler, Forstater, Wray and Godley.

Read it at Economonitor | Great Lead Forward
Who First Warned About The Euro? The WSJ Weighs-In
by L. Randall Wray

How sweet it is. Good to see recognition where recognition is due.

Jean Zin — Changing The System Of Production

Some issues discussed in previous comments are put forward here.

Journal of Peer Production
Changing The System Of Production
by Jean Zin

Translation: Mathieu O’Neil
from P2P Foundation by Michel Bauwens

Zach Carter — Austerity's Big Winners Prove To Be Wall Street And The Wealthy

The poor and middle classes have shouldered by far the heaviest burdens of the global political obsession with austerity policies over the past three years. In the United States, budget cuts have forced states to reduce education, public transportation, affordable housing and other social services. In Europe, welfare cuts have driven some severely disabled individuals to fear for their lives.

But the austerity game also has winners. Cutting or eliminating government programs that benefit the less advantaged has long been an ideological goal of conservatives. Doing so also generates a tidy windfall for the corporate class, as government services are privatized and savings from austerity pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens.

U.S. financial interests that stand to gain from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security cutbacks "have been the core of the big con," the "propaganda," that those programs are in crisis and must be slashed, said James Galbraith, an economist at the University of Texas.

Advocates of austerity measures have sold their proposals as a means to improve the economy.

"It is an error to think that fiscal austerity is a threat to growth and job creation," declared European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet in July 2010.

Read it at The Huffington Post
Austerity's Big Winners Prove To Be Wall Street And The Wealthy
by Zach Carter

Michael McAuliff — Jon Kyl Berates Obama For Focus On Middle Class

President Barack Obama should stop talking about the middle class because it turns people against rich Americans, who should be embraced as the Michael Jordans of the U.S. economy, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz,) said Monday. 

Declaring that the use of the phrase "middle class" is "misguided and wrong and even dangerous," Kyl argued in a Senate floor speech that Obama is "spreading economic resentment [that] weakens American values" and ignoring "the uniquely meritocratic basis of our society."

“We have a president who talks incessantly about class, particularly the middle class,” Kyl said.

"I just think the whole discussion of class is wrong. it's not what we do here in America," said Kyl, the Senate minority whip. He added, "I don't think there's anything called 'middle class values' that are different from the values of other people in this country. Tell me what's different about the values of someone who the president identifies as middle class?"

Read it at The Huffington Post
Jon Kyl Berates Obama For Focus On Middle Class
by Michael McAuliff

ROFL

AFP — Syria threatens to use chemical weapons against possible attack

Getting real out there.

Read it at Raw Story
Syria threatens to use chemical weapons against possible attack
by Agence France-Presse

Robert Wenzel — Alan Blinder: Release the Trillion in Excess Reserves!!

This will get you ROFL its so clueless. Alan Blinder wants to "release the 1.5 trillion in reserves" using a negative interest rate. Robert Wenzel at Economic Policy Journal thinks that Blinder has lost his mind because it will be inflationary.

Oh my.

Read it at Economic Policy Journal
Alan Blinder: Release the Trillion in Excess Reserves!!
by Robert Wenzel
(h/t Scott Fullwiler via Twitter)

McKibben Must-Read: ‘Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math’

Bill McKibben's three numbers

1. The First Number: 2° Celsius
2. The Second Number: 565 Gigatons
3. The Third Number: 2,795 Gigatons

Climate hawk Bill McKibben has a terrific new piece in Rolling Stone, “Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math.”
It is getting monster social media numbers of the kind usually reserved for pieces on HuffPost about Kim Kardashian in a bikini: 66k FaceBook likes and an astounding 6300 retweets. That means millions of people have likely been exposed to at least the headline and probably some of the opening text

Read it at Climate Progress
McKibben Must-Read: ‘Global Warming’s Terrifying New Math’
By Joe Romm

Dan Crawford — Economics an Almost Social Science

Links.

Read it at Angry Bear
Economics an Almost Social Science
Posted by Dan Crawford (Rdan)

Adbusters: Tactical Briefing #36 — The Strategic Pincer

The Strategic Pincer

Read it at Adbusters | Blog
Tactical Briefing #36
Posted by Adbusters

Check out Adbusters Magazine too, if you haven't ever. The online edition doesn't do justice to the print version. The Iowa City Library subscribes, so I get to check it out periodically in print. Impressive.

Chris Dillow — Fiscal Policy: The Cognitive Biases

The fact that government borrowing has risen so far this year reminds us of a key truth about the public finances - that they are less amenable to government control than generally thought. This is because government borrowing is the counterpart of private sector lending. Borrowing will fall when and only when private sector investment rises and savings fall. And this is not happening yet.

This poses a question. Given this, Why do so many people pretend that governments can easily control borrowing? I suspect it is because of a number of cognitive biases:

Read it at Stumbling and Mumbling
Fiscal Policy: The Cognitive Biases
by Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle

Gavyn Davies — Bond yields and disaster risk premia

Read it at The Financial Times |

Bond yields and disaster risk premia
by Gavyn Davies
(h/t apj in the comments)

Yep, and why safe currencies and gold are doing well too.

And when a lot of people are adopting a defensive portfolio strategy, and a lot of other people are saving and deleveraging, and this is happening across many countries, the likelihood of debt-deflation runs high owing to the paradox of thrift. When this is a situation affecting many key economies, the external cannot offset the domestic private retrenchment, and it is left up to governments. Should governments not step up sufficiently, then the situation will worsen and the result may become spiraling deflation. With a polarized political environment, the likelihood that governments will take appropriate action decline in proportion with the level of rigidity.

Jeff Cox — Did Fixing Libor Keep Financial Crisis From Getting Worse?: Bove

Bove: "It is time that this society realizes that it must understand the banking industry and how it interacts with the economy rather than dissolving into meaningless hyperbole again."

Read it at CNBC NetNet
Did Fixing Libor Keep Financial Crisis From Getting Worse?: Bove
by Jeff Cox | Senior Writer

The issue is representation and misrepresentation. Markets are represented to participants as free in the sense of not manipulated secretly. It is true that central banks attempt to micromanage economies through finance via interest rate setting, and also can control the yield curve, and that their operations are secret to the extent that the minutes are not revealed within a useful time frame. But the operations are standard operating procedure and they are acting institutionally. Everyone knows this and anticipates future central banking action. This is called the influence of "expectations" and such expectations play a role in financial and economic understanding.

However, Bove seems to mean by "this society realizes that it must understand the banking industry and how it interacts with the economy" that everyone should be on notice that the financial system is secretly rigged in such a way that SOP is not followed when it suits the major players because they determine the direction of the economy? Whaat?

Chris Dillow — Why austerity's failing

Chris Dillow does sectoral balances

Read it at Investors Chronicle (UK)
Why austerity's failing
by Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle
(h/t Scott Fullwiler via Twitter)

Chris Whalen — Paul Krugman and the New Austerity: Get Used to It

Chris Whalen goes all out neoliberal political.

Read it at Zero Hedge
Paul Krugman and the New Austerity: Get Used to It
Submitted by rcwhalen

Zero Hedge — Treasury Yields Plunge To All-Time Record Lows Across The Curve

Read it at Zero Hedge (short, charts)

Treasury Yields Plunge To All-Time Record Lows Across The Curve

Submitted by Tyler Durden

Gar Alperovitz — Wall Street Is Too Big to Regulate

It’s also true that not all Chicago School economists (not to mention their descendants) agreed with Simons, especially on the controversial issue of nationalization. But the logic of his argument remains: With high-paid lobbyists contesting every proposed regulation, it is increasingly clear that big banks can never be effectively controlled as private businesses. If an enterprise (or five of them) is so large and so concentrated that competition and regulation are impossible, the most market-friendly step is to nationalize its functions.

What about breaking up the banks, as many on the left favor? Recent history confirms another Chicago School judgment: while a breakup might work in the short term, the most likely course is what happened with Standard Oil and AT&T, which were broken up, only to essentially recombine a few decades later.

The New York Times | Opinion
Wall Street Is Too Big to Regulate
by Gar Alperovitz
(h/t Kevin Fathi via email)

Of course, it would probably take another financial meltdown to make banking nationalization politically tenable. But given how the sector has behaved since the last crisis, a repetition seems inevitable, and sooner rather than later.

This is the way that the scenario unfolds in my view at this point.

John Carney — Libor: What Criminal Charges Are Likely?

John Carney explains criminal law related to Liborgate. John is a bank lawyer. In his former position he would have been advising banks about such matters. He cites the statutes.

Read it at CNBC NetNet
Libor: What Criminal Charges Are Likely?
by John Carney | Senior Editor

George Monbiot — This bastardised libertarianism makes 'freedom' an instrument of oppression

It's the disguise used by those who wish to exploit without restraint, denying the need for the state to protect the 99%

Read it at The Guardian (UK)
This bastardised libertarianism makes 'freedom' an instrument of oppression
by George Monbiot
(h/t Lars Syll at Lars P. Syll's Blog)

Imperialist Indentured Workers

And people are worried about our youth, even wondering why many are dropping out of school and refusing student loans? At this rate, our kids should be worried about continued exposure to US! Try to explain the following to a 10 year old logician.

Japan: "We have ways to make our products dirt cheap to you ... and we're willing to use 'em!"

Japan Finance Minister Stresses Commitment to Acting on Undue Yen Rises

Maybe there'll be another Japan-German pact, to jointly indenture both populations? In the name of freedom?

When should we tell them that exports are a REAL cost, and imports a REAL benefit, regardless of the fiat numbers?

Meanwhile, did JP Morgan really say the following?

"People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principle men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capitalism to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd." - J. P. Morgan

Can someone verify that quote?

Are both Japan and America remaking themselves in Wall St.'s image?  Decisions, decisions. Is it "ban colonialism" or "banko-loanialism" .. ? Let's divide into groups and argue the point. (BMHOTK or Palm Slap or just stare in slackjawed numbness - your results may vary.)

All we need are slogans.    "Sounds stupid!"    .... vs ... "Less meaningful!"

Add Gordon Gekko as a spokesman, and we'll have some ribboting ads to keep competing frog choruses slowly boiling.  "We're ..... no ..... wiser."

Why, with continued practice & proper miseducation of our youth, we can achieve that!  It's a goal we've nearly met.  We can do it America!  Can't let Japan outdo us on THAT score either.  It's the Geithner way, or no way at all!  Yeah!  Let's DO nothing!  Forget miscegenation, "misceducation" is our real goal.

After all, we too are of no importance to ourselves except as entities to be misused.  Same for our kids.

Or?

Randy Wray — Why We’re Screwed

We are so screwed. These people did not act out of ignorance but greed, and they are winning. Randy lays out the gory details and explains why. It's the F-word. Fraud. And it leads to feudalism.

Randy nails it:

...they are not planning and conspiring for the restoration of feudalism. Still, that is the default scenario—the outcome that will emerge in the absence of action.

 In the second, the 99% occupy, shut down, and obliterate Wall Street. Honestly, I have no idea how that can happen. I am waiting for suggestions.

Read it at Economonitor | Great Leap Forward
Why We’re Screwed
by L. Randall Wray