The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1321

Post by Service Dog »

Keating wrote: Didn't something like 30% of all US dollars that have ever existed were created in the last year?
https://cdn.mises.org/styles/max_full/s ... k=xo5KKy8e

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1322

Post by Service Dog »

"...in October 2008 the Fed implemented a new policy of paying interest on bank reserves parked at the Fed. From an individual commercial bank’s perspective, the interest payment offered an incentive to refrain from making new loans to customers. Because of the massive QE purchases, plenty of newly created bank reserves flooded the system. Yet even though commercial banks had the legal ability to pyramid trillions of dollars of newly created loans on top of the Fed’s injections, they largely remained on the sidelines. The following chart of “excess” bank reserves illustrates this unprecedented development:"
https://cdn.mises.org/styles/max_full/s ... k=ioVt1bms
"As the chart indicates, prior to the financial crisis it was typical for the banking system as a whole to be (nearly) “fully loaned up,” meaning that excess reserves were close to $0. In other words, the normal state of affairs—prior to 2008—was for banks to make loans to their own customers until the point at which all of their reserves were “required reserves,” meaning that they legally couldn’t lend more money and still satisfy their reserves requirements.
Yet after 2008, as the Fed injected new reserves into the system through its three rounds of QE, the commercial banks did not lend out (several multiples of) these new reserves, as a standard textbook treatment would suggest. As the chart shows, at the (local) peak in mid-2014, excess reserves were just shy of $2.7 trillion."
https://mises.org/wire/crying-wolf-hyperinflation

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1323

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Keating wrote:
Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:36 pm
Didn't something like 30% of all US dollars that have ever existed were created in the last year?
Why does that matter? The populaton units can be taxed at 160%. That should bring inflation under control.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1324

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Wot with no nation being an Island (figuratively, smartarses), this new-fangled MMT would seem to require a global government. Go easy on me because I'm just an ignoramus who can't quite get his head around Magic Monetary Theory.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1325

Post by Service Dog »

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: MMT would seem to require a global government
MMT dogma divides the world into 1st World nations practicing MMT, at the expense of 3rd World nations unable to practice MMT. There's an MMT-Imperialism built-in to that arrangement. If MMT works, then existing Winners and Losers would be locked into those roles.

If the 'cure' is to expand a single MMT system to include the entire globe-- that's not-exactly anti-Imperialist.

Also MMTheory says the only Sovereign in a one-world global MMT currrency system-- would be the money-printers at the top. Individual nations would be subjects of the regime. Such as Greece losing currency sovereignty when they switched from drachmas to euros. Or US states being subject to the Federal currency.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1326

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

New material for California public schools: Math is racist, getting the right answer = white supremacy

https://equitablemath.org

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1327

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the economists."

paraphrasing

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11116
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1328

Post by Lsuoma »

Keating wrote: Didn't something like 30% of all US dollars that have ever existed were created in the last year?
I heard that too. But look at that rip-roaring inflation we have right now.

Regarding the(tax-exempt) [url-="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mises_Institute"]Mises Institute's[/url] RobertMurphy, well he would say that, wouldn't he? He's prolly still salty (am I allowed to use that word in 2021?) from the complete failure of his rabid predictions that QE from 2009 on would lead to double-digit inflation.

I'm going to let Kiwi keep the baton in responding about MMT, since Da Birb is doing such a good job.

I think that MMT is currently at the "then they fight you" stage.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11116
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1329

Post by Lsuoma »

Fuck it, fucked the fucking link, but you can see what I fucking mean.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1330

Post by Service Dog »

Service Dog wrote:
Lsuoma wrote: There has been no cogent case that I have seen leveled against MMT.
Please read Bob Murphy's book review & tell me whether that's sufficient.

https://mises.org/wire/review-stephanie ... ficit-myth
Read the book review.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1331

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Mass shooting at FeEx depot in Indianapolis:

https://abcnews.go.com/US/multiple-peop ... d=77109792

Apparently, workers were not allowed to keep cell phones on their person, preventing them from calling for help.

My GF is a FedEx courier. She has a CCW but company policy prohibits carrying at the depot or on the route -- she's not even supposed to keep a gun locked in her car in the parking lot, essentially preventing her from defending herself through a shitty neighborhood on her often late-night and early morning commutes. I picked her up at work just the other day and FTS hell yeah I was carrying.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1332

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Service Dog wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 5:55 am
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote: MMT would seem to require a global government
MMT dogma divides the world into 1st World nations practicing MMT, at the expense of 3rd World nations unable to practice MMT. There's an MMT-Imperialism built-in to that arrangement. If MMT works, then existing Winners and Losers would be locked into those roles.

If the 'cure' is to expand a single MMT system to include the entire globe-- that's not-exactly anti-Imperialist.

Also MMTheory says the only Sovereign in a one-world global MMT currrency system-- would be the money-printers at the top. Individual nations would be subjects of the regime. Such as Greece losing currency sovereignty when they switched from drachmas to euros. Or US states being subject to the Federal currency.
The only nations that can contemplate MMT are the ones whose currencies are protected against exchange rate crashes, i.e. global reserve currencies. But It's a HUGE assumption that the world isn't going to bug out of the dollar if the US ignores history. From what I understand the only way MMT can work is if supply keeps pace with the increased demand, but I thought the progressives wanted, quite sensibly, to move away from a model that relies on never-ending growth

Who knew it was all so easy. Print money and use taxation as a magic control lever while taking interest rates out of the equation as a means of control. Why would taxation be such a precise instrument now when it never has been before? I never could understand economics at a fundamental level. It seems self-referential and somewhat of a voodoo science. MMT looks to be a theory which denies history and relies on a number of assumptions, any one of which could be fatal if incorrect. It would be nice it it were proven correct, although I have a sneaking suspicion that it comes with the price tag of requiring an economy based on the Chinese model of state control.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1333

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Whle trying to educate myself a little more I came across this gem of a comment:
"When they argue that a sovereign government has no budget constraint, the more scrupulous ones add “fiscal” or “financial”. But democratic governments face a political constraint on spending and taxation and all governments face a “torches and pitch forks” constraint at some level of repression."

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1334

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

And now I am confused as to what MMT actually is. Seems it morphs into something different between breakfast and dinner so you have to be careful that criticisms, even if technically correct, are addressing whatever the MMT proponent in question actually believes. Of course the only versions of MMT that actually matter are the ones held by those in power.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17423
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1335

Post by Brive1987 »

Keating wrote: I've been experimenting with 30 hour fasts and finding them quite good for me.
Nice. How often? I’m focusing on 18:6 five days a week. That seems to work nicely.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17423
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1336

Post by Brive1987 »


KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1337

Post by KiwiInOz »

Lsuoma wrote:
Keating wrote: Didn't something like 30% of all US dollars that have ever existed were created in the last year?
I heard that too. But look at that rip-roaring inflation we have right now.

Regarding the(tax-exempt) [url-="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mises_Institute"]Mises Institute's[/url] RobertMurphy, well he would say that, wouldn't he? He's prolly still salty (am I allowed to use that word in 2021?) from the complete failure of his rabid predictions that QE from 2009 on would lead to double-digit inflation.

I'm going to let Kiwi keep the baton in responding about MMT, since Da Birb is doing such a good job.

I think that MMT is currently at the "then they fight you" stage.
I'll try and make some time to get back onto this tomorrow. There seem to be a few "creationists" here arguing from incredulity. :-)

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1338

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

KiwiInOz wrote: I'll try and make some time to get back onto this tomorrow. There seem to be a few "creationists" here arguing from incredulity. :-)
Maybe it's all those mule kicks to the head, but to me, MMT seems to be based on the premise that the currency won't devalue so long as we all pretend we haven't devaluated the currency.

Please explain in terms that even a brain-damaged simpleton like me can understand.

John D
.
.
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1339

Post by John D »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
KiwiInOz wrote: I'll try and make some time to get back onto this tomorrow. There seem to be a few "creationists" here arguing from incredulity. :-)
Maybe it's all those mule kicks to the head, but to me, MMT seems to be based on the premise that the currency won't devalue so long as we all pretend we haven't devaluated the currency.

Please explain in terms that even a brain-damaged simpleton like me can understand.
SO.... hmmm... my thoughts... for what it's worth.

Over the years I have been greatly deceived by economists. Some economists do some great work. Gad Sadd for example, but Gad does not spend his time predicting monetary policy... so good for him.

Every time the macro economy is doing unpredictable things the economists are compelled to find a new model for how the economy works. They are motivated by fame (what little there is for economists) and by getting the next book deal. I remember all the books by famous crystal-ball gazers before the great recession. There where book titles like "Dow 50,000". I read the book by Greenspan where he denied anything was wrong with real estate prices. He predicted continuing growth. A few people were warning of the impending doom... but no one cared to listen. Afterall, who really wants to think things will be going bad soon. This is MMT. MMT sounds to me like a fake theory explaining why the good times will continue.

The national debt is unsustainable. We all know this must be true. Right? Somehow this must be true.

I don't know exactly what is happening right now, but I suspect it is a kind of blind ignorance. Mass blind ignorance.

So, in the short term, I think people will stay blind. We will exit from the hellish pandemic. Spending will stay strong. Unemployment will go down. Companies will make money. Stocks will rise.

BUT... and we know this is true... some day fairly soon... this will turn. It always does. It will again.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1340

Post by Service Dog »

John D wrote: "Dow 50,000"... MMT sounds to me like a fake theory explaining why the good times will continue.
My last 2 years of high school-- my best friends were the 2 smartest guys in school. One took his math and science classes at the University & his summer job was flying to Cupertino to work on a design team for the first Macintosh computer. The other was my debate team partner-- perfect grades, perfect 1600 on his SAT, golden-boy politician good looks, Ivy League scholarship. After college, he went to work for Jeff Bezos, pre-Amazon. Then he founded & ran his own hedge fund. He was a 'quant'-- investing using Quantitative Analysis, which means you examine the stock chart ups & downs & volume-- and predict what the price will do next... regardless of such mundane details such as which business the company is in.

As cracks emerged in the endless-good-times of the dotcom bubble, a significant amount of money landed in my pocket. I started day-trading and outperformed both the smart guys. The apple computer guy was primarily invested-in (and working for) a tech start-up-- which tanked when the CFO was caught doctoring financial report numbers. The hedge fund guy was on TV-- literally responding to doubts about his investing model-- by saying: "You don't know how the engine in your car works, but you get-in and drive it anyway, and trust it will keep working." Of course-- he lost a lot of money for the people who believed him & gave him their money. I stopped playing the stock market after 9/11, deciding it would was impossible for me to predict what would happen next. I do know how my car's engine works, and I don't drive a car I can't afford-- if it breaks-down forever.

I agree that MMT cheerleading sounds like bubble-times happytalk.

MMT also reminds me of Jordan P. Redskull's line about Communism: even if you're a noble goodguy communist-- the badguy communists will shoot you in the back of the head & take-over, long-before you can ever establish Good Communism.

A goodguy MMT practicioner might have every intention of, sometime in the future, curtailing the MoneyPrinterGoBrrrrrrrrr according to prudent MMT limits... but when the time to actually curtail the money-printing... the goodguy will be cast-aside in favor of a Spend Like There's No Tomorrow bad guy.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1341

Post by Service Dog »

Today at Grand Army Plaza, under the cool statues of civil war soldiers, naked slaves, chariots, and war angels with their tits out...


A pseudo-gospel choir clad in white sang in half-assed harmony...



They held slickly-printed signs saying "NEW YORKERS FOR D.C. STATEHOOD". and "51 FOR 51". <--whatever that means.



I cracked jokes... I said they were barely resisting an urge to topple the civil war statues. They only want 51 states so they can burn all the 50-star US flags. Can't we just agree to let D.C. ~identify~ as a state?

and I proposed another slogan: WHY STOP THERE?! STATEHOOD FOR FACEBOOK!

Pack the Supreme Court, add new BLM-friendly states, flood the borders with welfare-dependent people, mobilize giant corporations against voting security laws, censor dissent via big tech, transform the news media into an orwellian bullhorn...

...they're really showing what a do-nothing pussy Obama was!

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2213
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1342

Post by Keating »

Brive1987 wrote:
Keating wrote: I've been experimenting with 30 hour fasts and finding them quite good for me.
Nice. How often? I’m focusing on 18:6 five days a week. That seems to work nicely.
Roughly once a week, and never on a day when I hit the gym. I find it's helping me better calibrate my appetite - I'm better able to tell when I will be comfortably full.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2213
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1343

Post by Keating »

Lsuoma wrote: I'm going to let Kiwi keep the baton in responding about MMT, since Da Birb is doing such a good job.

I think that MMT is currently at the "then they fight you" stage.
Meh, I don't have a particular dog in this fight. Intuitively, it doesn't make sense to me. For the time being, given his past success, I'm inclined to think people like Michael Burry know what they're talking about and I'm trying to plan accordingly.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17423
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1344

Post by Brive1987 »

Keating wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Keating wrote: I've been experimenting with 30 hour fasts and finding them quite good for me.
Nice. How often? I’m focusing on 18:6 five days a week. That seems to work nicely.
Roughly once a week, and never on a day when I hit the gym. I find it's helping me better calibrate my appetite - I'm better able to tell when I will be comfortably full.
Zero is a good fasting app.

I just accept now that it will take 30 mins for food to kick in and satiate.

I therefore need to stop in anticipation even though my brain is still saying “yum, eat more”. A kJ ceiling is a good way to manage input - seperate from subjective appetite signals.

But then you’re not trying to control weight. So meh.

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1345

Post by KiwiInOz »

Once upon a time many nations, such as the US and Australia, tied their monetary systems to the gold standard. Following WWII, nations such as Australia then tied their exchange rates to the US dollar (the Bretton Woods Agreement). All currencies pegged to the US dollar then had a fixed value in terms of gold.

Government deficits during these times had to be financed by debt because the stock of money in their currency was tied to how much gold they had.

Richard Nixon ended the international convertibility of US dollars to gold in 1971. There ended the gold standard.

The implications of the end of the gold standard is that the currency of countries such as Australia became non-convertible. This meant in actuality that national currency issuing Governments no longer faced financial constraints in their own currency.

However, the ideological interests of many were and continue to be served by claiming that fiscal policy is constrained as it was during the gold standard period. The term "printing money" is a hang over from this time and does not apply to modern economies. It should have died in 1971, and most certainly is a zombie in the age of digital currency.

The upshot is that the Australian, British, Canadian, and US Governments neither has nor doesn't have money. It does have the capacity to spend money into existence to purchase goods and services. It does not need to have "money in the bank" to buy goods and services from the non government sector.

Government deficits become financial assets in non-government accounts. Fiscal policy creates (in the form of Government deficits) or destroys (in the form of Government surpluses) financial assets in the non government sector.

The real constraint to Government spending (note that I am not talking about State Governments, because they can't issue currency) is the productive capacity of the economy (not some arrangement of pixels on one side or the other of an accounting spreadsheet).

Most of the commentariat who raise the spectre of inflation at the mere whiff of a Govt deficit are holding onto the discredited Quantity Theory of Money. It is irrelevant to economies with under utilised capacity, such as the US. Government spending could result in inflation if the nominal aggregate demand is pushed beyond the real capacity of the economy to respond to it (in output). I can't imagine any Government doing that.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1346

Post by Service Dog »

KiwiInOz wrote: Once upon a time many nations, such as the US and Australia, tied their monetary systems to the gold standard. Following WWII, nations such as Australia then tied their exchange rates to the US dollar (the Bretton Woods Agreement). All currencies pegged to the US dollar then had a fixed value in terms of gold.

Government deficits during these times had to be financed by debt because the stock of money in their currency was tied to how much gold they had.

Richard Nixon ended the international convertibility of US dollars to gold in 1971. There ended the gold standard.

The implications of the end of the gold standard is that the currency of countries such as Australia became non-convertible. This meant in actuality that national currency issuing Governments no longer faced financial constraints in their own currency.

However, the ideological interests of many were and continue to be served by claiming that fiscal policy is constrained as it was during the gold standard period. The term "printing money" is a hang over from this time and does not apply to modern economies. It should have died in 1971, and most certainly is a zombie in the age of digital currency.

The upshot is that the Australian, British, Canadian, and US Governments neither has nor doesn't have money. It does have the capacity to spend money into existence to purchase goods and services. It does not need to have "money in the bank" to buy goods and services from the non government sector.

Government deficits become financial assets in non-government accounts. Fiscal policy creates (in the form of Government deficits) or destroys (in the form of Government surpluses) financial assets in the non government sector.

The real constraint to Government spending (note that I am not talking about State Governments, because they can't issue currency) is the productive capacity of the economy (not some arrangement of pixels on one side or the other of an accounting spreadsheet).

Most of the commentariat who raise the spectre of inflation at the mere whiff of a Govt deficit are holding onto the discredited Quantity Theory of Money. It is irrelevant to economies with under utilised capacity, such as the US. Government spending could result in inflation if the nominal aggregate demand is pushed beyond the real capacity of the economy to respond to it (in output). I can't imagine any Government doing that.
Such extraordinary claims. You're merely repeating the holy dogma of your MMT religion.

You haven't engaged with the criticisms of skeptics outside your cult.

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1347

Post by KiwiInOz »

Service Dog wrote:
KiwiInOz wrote: Once upon a time many nations, such as the US and Australia, tied their monetary systems to the gold standard. Following WWII, nations such as Australia then tied their exchange rates to the US dollar (the Bretton Woods Agreement). All currencies pegged to the US dollar then had a fixed value in terms of gold.

Government deficits during these times had to be financed by debt because the stock of money in their currency was tied to how much gold they had.

Richard Nixon ended the international convertibility of US dollars to gold in 1971. There ended the gold standard.

The implications of the end of the gold standard is that the currency of countries such as Australia became non-convertible. This meant in actuality that national currency issuing Governments no longer faced financial constraints in their own currency.

However, the ideological interests of many were and continue to be served by claiming that fiscal policy is constrained as it was during the gold standard period. The term "printing money" is a hang over from this time and does not apply to modern economies. It should have died in 1971, and most certainly is a zombie in the age of digital currency.

The upshot is that the Australian, British, Canadian, and US Governments neither has nor doesn't have money. It does have the capacity to spend money into existence to purchase goods and services. It does not need to have "money in the bank" to buy goods and services from the non government sector.

Government deficits become financial assets in non-government accounts. Fiscal policy creates (in the form of Government deficits) or destroys (in the form of Government surpluses) financial assets in the non government sector.

The real constraint to Government spending (note that I am not talking about State Governments, because they can't issue currency) is the productive capacity of the economy (not some arrangement of pixels on one side or the other of an accounting spreadsheet).

Most of the commentariat who raise the spectre of inflation at the mere whiff of a Govt deficit are holding onto the discredited Quantity Theory of Money. It is irrelevant to economies with under utilised capacity, such as the US. Government spending could result in inflation if the nominal aggregate demand is pushed beyond the real capacity of the economy to respond to it (in output). I can't imagine any Government doing that.
Such extraordinary claims. You're merely repeating the holy dogma of your MMT religion.

You haven't engaged with the criticisms of skeptics outside your cult.
E pur si muove

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2213
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1348

Post by Keating »


Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17423
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1349

Post by Brive1987 »

General purpose metaphor


Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1350

Post by Service Dog »

I crossed-out the part that's not in dispute. It's not MMT.
Once upon a time many nations, such as the US and Australia, tied their monetary systems to the gold standard. Following WWII, nations such as Australia then tied their exchange rates to the US dollar (the Bretton Woods Agreement). All currencies pegged to the US dollar then had a fixed value in terms of gold.

Government deficits during these times had to be financed by debt because the stock of money in their currency was tied to how much gold they had.

Richard Nixon ended the international convertibility of US dollars to gold in 1971. There ended the gold standard.

The implications of the end of the gold standard is that the currency of countries such as Australia became non-convertible. This meant in actuality that national currency issuing Governments no longer faced financial constraints in their own currency.
Which brings us to here. This is actual MMT:
However, the ideological interests of many were and continue to be served by claiming that fiscal policy is constrained as it was during the gold standard period.
Note that MMT frames the dispute as an "ideological" conspiracy in the service of sinister interests (an irrational fear of "ooga booga socialism", in the words of Kiwi) rather than an honest good-faith disagreement among sincere observers-- who happen to hold differing ideas about how economies work & which practical policy solutions are viable. No one reeeeeeeallly disagrees with MMT-- we just pretend-to disagree with MMT because we're controlled by the reptilian jewish bankers in cryogenic telepathy bunkers the the pyramids.
The term "printing money" is a hang over from this time and does not apply to modern economies.
This is the opposite of true. "Printing money" was INaccurate when the paper money (or written in a ledger money) was backed by a hard asset: back-then, the printing was limited by the underlying asset.

"Printing money" is far-more apt to describe money untethered from any hard guarantee.

By the way-- Kiwi skips-over a huuuuge middle step between the gold-standard and untethered MMT funny money: namely, money which is not backed by gold but IS backed by some 3rd party acting as co-signer for the govt's debt. Such as taxes-- in-which the taxpayers guarantee the debt. And such as Treasuries-- which are loans to the govt to cover the debt.

=
Continuing on... the next section is nothing but Kiwi singing the MMT choirbook. But, as I said above, Kiwi fails to engage with objections raised by skeptics:
The term "printing money" is a hang over from this time and does not apply to modern economies. It should have died in 1971, and most certainly is a zombie in the age of digital currency.

The upshot is that the Australian, British, Canadian, and US Governments neither has nor doesn't have money. It does have the capacity to spend money into existence to purchase goods and services. It does not need to have "money in the bank" to buy goods and services from the non government sector.

Government deficits become financial assets in non-government accounts. Fiscal policy creates (in the form of Government deficits) or destroys (in the form of Government surpluses) financial assets in the non government sector.

The real constraint to Government spending (note that I am not talking about State Governments, because they can't issue currency) is the productive capacity of the economy (not some arrangement of pixels on one side or the other of an accounting spreadsheet).

Most of the commentariat who raise the spectre of inflation at the mere whiff of a Govt deficit are holding onto the discredited Quantity Theory of Money. It is irrelevant to economies with under utilised capacity, such as the US. Government spending could result in inflation if the nominal aggregate demand is pushed beyond the real capacity of the economy to respond to it (in output). I can't imagine any Government doing that.
I look forward to Kiwi reading & reacting-to Bob Murphy's review of the MMT book.

https://mises.org/wire/review-stephanie ... ficit-myth

Pitchguest
.
.
Posts: 3985
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2012 3:44 pm

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1351

Post by Pitchguest »

So maybe it's time to ask ourselves just how virulent this virus really is.

Cases in states like Texas and Arkansas have not increased since they abolished their mask mandates and have, in fact, steadily dropped...

... and Fauci is "not quite sure" and "confused" why that is.

Covid-19 is supposedly more virulent than the common cold, more virulent than the flu, more virulent than ebola and the previous incarnation of the virus, SARS, but for some reason, despite being spread by not just germs on surfaces but also having the extremely dangerous quality of being airborne, it has failed to infect even 1/10 of the world, and the death rate is lower still. And what of masks? Even the description on the boxes explicitly say they don't protect against Covid-19. It's all so ass-backwards, all of it.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1352

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

Service Dog wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 6:26 am

I look forward to Kiwi reading & reacting-to Bob Murphy's review of the MMT book.

https://mises.org/wire/review-stephanie ... ficit-myth
Would appear to poke enough holes in Kelton's argument to sink it with no hope of salvage. Some of it was too dense for my necktop to process, but just one point in there alone seems like enough to sink Kelton. The assumption is that the US Treasury can just overspend and put the Fed account into deficit and the Fed will back it. The Fed has never gone into deficit, that may be unconstitutional (although not an obstacle in the current climate) and to assume that all of those foreign holders of trillions of USD are not going to blanche and drop dollars like a hot potato is not wise. After all, it can be argued that the prudency of the Fed is the very reason for confidence in the value of the dollar.

fafnir
.
.
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2015 6:16 pm

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1353

Post by fafnir »

I might be wrong, but wasn't Nixon dropping the gold standard in the 70s partly because there was growing doubt that they actually had enough gold and had been "printing money"? I dimly remember a claim that the British and French called them on this.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1354

Post by Service Dog »

fafnir wrote: I might be wrong, but wasn't Nixon dropping the gold standard in the 70s partly because there was growing doubt that they actually had enough gold and had been "printing money"? I dimly remember a claim that the British and French called them on this.
The 1944 Bretton Woods agreement tied the Allies currency exchange rates to the value of gold-- eventually including US, Canada, Western Europe, Australia, and Japan. Actually-- the rates were tied to gold AND the US dollar: $35 USD for an ounce of Gold... and all the other currencies were assigned exchange rates in US dollars.

On August 15 1971, Nixon gave birth to MMT by severing the US Dollar from the set exchange-rate in Gold...
and, later, even more MMT-ish, by breaking his promise to resume the gold standard after Inflation was 'whipped'. :dance:

Nixon went on teevee & talked MMT happytalk:

"I have directed Secretary Connally to suspend temporarily the convertibility of the dollar into gold or other reserve assets, except in amounts and conditions determined to be in the interest of monetary stability and in the best interests of the United States.

Now, what is this action—which is very technical—what does it mean for you?

Let me lay to rest the bugaboo of what is called devaluation.

If you want to buy a foreign car or take a trip abroad, market conditions may cause your dollar to buy slightly less. But if you are among the overwhelming majority of Americans who buy American-made products in America, your dollar will be worth just as much tomorrow as it is today."


Nixon's MMT announcement was initially popular with the US public. Then the dollar promptly lost a third of it's buying power.

In fairness to Nixon, it's worth mentioning that he didn't act unilaterally:

"In France, the Bretton Woods system was called "America's exorbitant privilege"[5] as it resulted in an "asymmetric financial system" where non-US citizens "see themselves supporting American living standards and subsidizing American multinationals". As American economist Barry Eichengreen summarized: "It costs only a few cents for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce a $100 bill, but other countries had to pony up $100 of actual goods in order to obtain one".[5]

In February 1965 President Charles de Gaulle announced his intention to exchange its U.S. dollar reserves for gold at the official exchange rate.[6] In May 1971, West Germany left the Bretton Woods system, unwilling to revalue the Deutsche Mark.[9] In the following three months, this move strengthened its economy. Simultaneously, the dollar dropped 7.5% against the Deutsche Mark.[9] Other nations began to demand redemption of their dollars for gold. Switzerland redeemed $50 million in July.[9] France acquired $191 million in gold.[9] On August 5, 1971, the United States Congress released a report recommending devaluation of the dollar, in an effort to protect the dollar against "foreign price-gougers".[9] On August 9, 1971, as the dollar dropped in value against European currencies, Switzerland left the Bretton Woods system.[9] The pressure began to intensify on the United States to leave Bretton Woods."

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1355

Post by KiwiInOz »

Oh doggie. You seem to have a problem differentiating between IS and OUGHT, as does your erstwhile book reviewer.

Here are the Is's (and Is nots).

Sovereign governments with fiat (digital) currency are constrained by the productive capacity of their economy and the aggregate demand/output. They are also constrained by political checks and balances.

They are not however constrained by revenue, unlike a State Government, a business, or a household. Federal taxation has other roles in a modern economy. It reduces the spending power of the taxpayer (and can therefore be used to target inflation) and it it provides and incentive/disincentive to achieve particular policy outcomes. The money sent to the tax office by cheque or bank transfer is removed from the economy and its spending power is destroyed. It is pixels on a spreadsheet. It is not revenue, given that the Government fed that money into the economy in the first place.

The Oughts are most definitely open to debate and discussion and spending priorities go to the Government of the day. This is where the strawmen get a full beating, and clever witicisms like Magic Money Tree bear fruit, when talking about MMT. Doggie for some reason is obsessed with pussy hats for all - a Government could conceivably do this, but why would they unless it had some political or economic benefit?

The key difference between public understanding that Governments are not revenue constrained, or believing that they are constrained by tax receipts, is that you can call them out as ignorant or liars when they say that they can't do some action, e.g. universal healthcare, because they can't afford it. Similarly when they say at election time that their opponent will raise taxes and spend profligately, therefore vote for us. They actually need to be honest about their spending policy positions and the reasons for them.

The electorate can then make a considered choice. And yes, some voters always fall for the pork barrelling. It is a long and honoured tradition in politics. This is where, for example, legal checks and balances could require that political parties provide evidence based modelling of their desired spending outcomes.

Now to a couple of doggies flights of fancy:
Note that MMT frames the dispute as an "ideological" conspiracy in the service of sinister interests (an irrational fear of "ooga booga socialism", in the words of Kiwi) rather than an honest good-faith disagreement among sincere observers-- who happen to hold differing ideas about how economies work & which practical policy solutions are viable. No one reeeeeeeallly disagrees with MMT-- we just pretend-to disagree with MMT because we're controlled by the reptilian jewish bankers in cryogenic telepathy bunkers the the pyramids.
Yeah, nah. Bit of projection, perhaps? But beat that strawman to within an inch of its life.
By the way-- Kiwi skips-over a huuuuge middle step between the gold-standard and untethered MMT funny money: namely, money which is not backed by gold but IS backed by some 3rd party acting as co-signer for the govt's debt. Such as taxes-- in-which the taxpayers guarantee the debt. And such as Treasuries-- which are loans to the govt to cover the debt.
Yeah, nah. Actually the value of all money in your economy is backed by Government guarantee, not some mythical third party. Note that Government owns all legal tender. And Treasury is Government directed. It lends itself the money to pay itself back. And further, no party other than the Government is able to create fiat currency.

MMT money is not funny money, it is just money.

This on the other hand:

https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/i ... ?fit=scale

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7561
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1356

Post by MarcusAu »

I also take issue with KiwiInOz...

...he should go by KiwiInAustralia.

That way he could acronymise and still make the sharp impression that everyone would expect.

ThreeFlangedJavis
.
.
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:13 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1357

Post by ThreeFlangedJavis »

KiwiInOz wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 8:10 pm

Sovereign governments with fiat (digital) currency are constrained by the productive capacity of their economy and the aggregate demand/output. They are also constrained by political checks and balances.

They are not however constrained by revenue, unlike a State Government, a business, or a household. Federal taxation has other roles in a modern economy. It reduces the spending power of the taxpayer (and can therefore be used to target inflation) and it it provides and incentive/disincentive to achieve particular policy outcomes. The money sent to the tax office by cheque or bank transfer is removed from the economy and its spending power is destroyed. It is pixels on a spreadsheet. It is not revenue, given that the Government fed that money into the economy in the first place.
Did you read that article that Dog linked? It would appear to raise doubt about some of the assertions on which MMT is based. I'd be interested to hear your rebuttal to the points raised because it only takes one of them to be valid to scupper a theory like MMT. The relationship between money fed into the economy and production is dependent on many things and probably not as efficient as proposed, so that slack in the economy may be theoretical to a certain extent.

A government is 'sovereign' and theoretically unconstrained by revenue if it can convince others to regard it's currency as being reliably worth something, otherwise they take on debt in other currencies and then exchange rates start to matter, a lot.

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1358

Post by KiwiInOz »

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
KiwiInOz wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 8:10 pm

Sovereign governments with fiat (digital) currency are constrained by the productive capacity of their economy and the aggregate demand/output. They are also constrained by political checks and balances.

They are not however constrained by revenue, unlike a State Government, a business, or a household. Federal taxation has other roles in a modern economy. It reduces the spending power of the taxpayer (and can therefore be used to target inflation) and it it provides and incentive/disincentive to achieve particular policy outcomes. The money sent to the tax office by cheque or bank transfer is removed from the economy and its spending power is destroyed. It is pixels on a spreadsheet. It is not revenue, given that the Government fed that money into the economy in the first place.
Did you read that article that Dog linked? It would appear to raise doubt about some of the assertions on which MMT is based. I'd be interested to hear your rebuttal to the points raised because it only takes one of them to be valid to scupper a theory like MMT. The relationship between money fed into the economy and production is dependent on many things and probably not as efficient as proposed, so that slack in the economy may be theoretical to a certain extent.

A government is 'sovereign' and theoretically unconstrained by revenue if it can convince others to regard it's currency as being reliably worth something, otherwise they take on debt in other currencies and then exchange rates start to matter, a lot.
I'll see what I can do. I only play an economist on the internet.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1359

Post by Service Dog »

One thing I'm still unclear on, is whether individual US states would be able to practice MMT.

Although no one in this discussion-- or in any sources offered above-- suggested that individual US states *could* practice MMT...

...and, in fact, above, I explicitly compared "Greece losing currency sovereignty when they switched from Drachmas to Euros." to "US states being subject to the Federal currency."

And, in the book review Bob Murphy states: " most governments (including state governments in the US) in the world aren’t “monetary sovereigns”...

...nonetheless, Kiwi has correctly,wisely, and not-at-all-blowhard-pedantically intuited that this is a crucial distinction worth dwelling on for 4 days; rather than addressing any of the objections to MMT which were actually raised.

April 15
KiwiInOz wrote: States, on the other hand, require revenue from taxation or from Federal Government allocation.
April 18
KiwiInOz wrote: The real constraint to Government spending (note that I am not talking about State Governments, because they can't issue currency)
April 19
KiwiInOz wrote: They are not however constrained by revenue, unlike a State Government,
So, as any fool can plainly see, this conversation would really move forward if only Kiwi would lecture us further on whether it's feasible for Kentucky or Utah or perhaps Indiana to employ MMT at the state level. And what about Mississippi? Not to mention Delaware.

Heck, while we're at it-- this might be a good time to refresh our memory as to the basic claims of MMT. Kiwi *ought* to just keep repeating rudimentary MMT claims, straight from the MMT Koran, until the critics finally hear the way the truth and the light. Thus all their criticisms will have been pre-emptively addressed.

Lsuoma wrote: There has been no cogent case that I have seen leveled against MMT. Stephanie Kelton's book appears to be the best current description.

I've not seen any arguments raised against it that don't end with either "Can't see anything wrong with this," or "Shut up, I'm an economist and you don't understand it because you're too dumb!"
^simplification, but not by much^
Lsuoma wrote: I'm going to let Kiwi keep the baton in responding about MMT, since Da Birb is doing suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuch a good job.

I think that MMT is currently at the "then they fight you" stage.

Lsuoma
Fascist Tit
Posts: 11116
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Punggye-ri

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1360

Post by Lsuoma »

States cannot practice MMT, as they do not issue a sovereign currency.


Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1362

Post by Service Dog »

John D wrote: ...I read the book by Greenspan where he denied anything was wrong with real estate prices...
Back then, the miracle of alchemy began-with "Subprime" mortgages to people with shitty credit ratings, shitty incomes, and shitty life-stability.

When large numbers of those Subprime loans were bundled-together, the alchemists declared that bundles of shitty Subprime loans transubstantiated into something greater than the sum of it's parts: a highest-rating "AAA" asset. And the golden AAA asset could be used as collateral to buy more bundles formerly risky Subprime/ but now AAA assets. Repeat until the bubble popped & the shitty people defaulted on their shitty mortgages, en masse.

At that point, the huge investment banks were deemed 'too big to fail' and the MMT playbook was put into action. As per MMT doctrine, Billions of Dollars were conjured into existence by the Fed, appearing in the accounting ledgers of the Investment Banks. The banks were only required to keep a tiny percentage of that fresh new digital money in their coffers-- for each dollar "in" the bank, they were authorized to create 20 or 40 bucks of loans to the public. To "trickle-down" into the economy, one might say.

Economists like Bob Murphy (as Lsuoma noted) predicted hyper-inflation would result. And yet-- it did not. Why not? I think the answer might be in my 2nd post, at the top of this page. I stumbled across that chart & the paragraphs sandwiching the the chart-- when I was looking-up the answer to Keating's question about money-supply. Whut it sez is-- the Investment Banks didn't 'trickle down' the heaps of MMT cash they were given-- by distributing the money as Trillions in loans to the public. Why not? Because a Rule Change said that the Banks could themselves now COLLECT INTEREST on those heaps of new cash. And so they sat on the money & satisfied themselves with the interest-income!

Kelton's MMT turns a blind eye to the banks hoarding the $$$. Kelton pretends the money WAS 'trickled down' into the economy-- but A MIRACLE OCCURRED and the flood of money didn't result in price inflation of goods. Hence Kiwi declaring that the "Quantity Theory of Money" is "discredited". The Quantity Theory of Money says players at a poker table with 50 betting chips between-them will use the 50 betting chips to play. But if you give them 100 betting chips, they'll use 100 chips... but they'll pretty-much play the same amount of poker before they get tired and go home. MMT says they'll play with 50 chips and use the next to finance the Green New Deal.

John-- in a previous post you mentioned that you're wary of Inflation but, for now, you're content to leave your investments in the Stock Market-- which as been booming & you don't think the boom is over yet. Reading that made my hair tingle with worry. "Inflation" is commonly used as shorthand for "Price Inflation" which is commonly tracked by the CPI Consumer Price Index... the prices of certain consumer goods. The CPI has blind spots-- it doesn't include the price of Food or Energy, for example. Which is a big deal, if you look at how much it cost to put gas in your car this year.

But I've heard somebody (Peter Schiff?) say that the blind spots aren't enough to explain-away the lack of apparent Inflation we currently see/ vs. what the doomsayers expected to see.

My suspicion is-- that Consumer Goods and Services aren't where all the Free Money is being spent. When they're flush with free money, Investment banks and Wall Street don't go-down to the corner store and buy extra bags of potato chips and bottles of Ranch Dressing. The things the Fatcats spend their free-money on-- are things like Stocks. It seems to me that the throbbing upward rise in the Stock Market-- is not based on the soundness of those investments going up&up&up. The Stock Market Surge is an inflation in the price of stocks/ based on the big-buyers-of-stocks having free QE money burning holes in their pockets. Stocks seem like a safer place for the fatcats to park their wealth-- same with other investment vehicles such as real estate, fine art, cryptocurrency-- rather than leave the wealth in the form of US Dollars-- which are likely to implode in value Real Quick Sometime Soon.

And that brings us back to MMT: MMT sez the govt can print a bunch of fiat money by spending it on Green New Deals or Rayethon Bombs or whatever. And then-- what next? That money migrates somewhere. The MMT Bernie Bros want to see the money go where they want-it-to. And if it doesn't go where they want-- MMT reserves the right to tax whatever forbidden thing people DO invest their wealth into. Higher taxes on the buying and selling of stocks. Taxes on precious metal purchases. Taxes-on (or prohibition-of) cryptocurrency transactions. Taxes on transactions outside the borders of MMT land.

What Gives The MMT Fuckers The Right To Seize Everyone's Wealth Like That ?!! When JK Rowling makes-up the Harry Potter stories out of her imagination, and then parlays the stories into her Billionaire status... only Might Makes Right allows the govt to over-and-over-and-over tax her pile of wealth. Taking every bit of it, if they whim catches their fancy.

Kiwi isn't bothered by this, because Kiwi is a pinko-socialist who believes you belong to the State, not to yourself, and so do the fruits of your labor, slave. But I'm bothered by it. Kiwi's recommendation for MMT info is a dude name Bill Mitchell who is the director of a 'Center for Full Employment and Equity*' which tells you all ya need to know. (*at the expense of everything else.)

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1363

Post by Service Dog »


John D
.
.
Posts: 5055
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:23 am
Location: Detroit, MI. USA

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1364

Post by John D »

Service Dog wrote:
John D wrote: ...I read the book by Greenspan where he denied anything was wrong with real estate prices...

John-- in a previous post you mentioned that you're wary of Inflation but, for now, you're content to leave your investments in the Stock Market-- which as been booming & you don't think the boom is over yet. Reading that made my hair tingle with worry. "Inflation" is commonly used as shorthand for "Price Inflation" which is commonly tracked by the CPI Consumer Price Index... the prices of certain consumer goods. The CPI has blind spots-- it doesn't include the price of Food or Energy, for example. Which is a big deal, if you look at how much it cost to put gas in your car this year.
Yeah.... my hair is also tingling. Haha.

I am trying to understand what is going on so I can properly time my exit from the stock market. Something will make the market go "pop"! Is it the value of the dollar vs. other currencies.... or is it the banking interest rate... or is it the measure of inflation of purchased goods? I don't know. I just don't think the stock prices are sustainable.... but I can't afford to stay out of the market.

I turn 60 in October. I am running out of time to invest. I have been in stocks my whole life because stocks have better returns than most other things (over the long term). At some point I have to limit my downside risk.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1365

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

My final take on the Chauvin trial:

https://trueliberalnexus.com/2021/04/19 ... ble-doubt/

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1366

Post by Service Dog »

I have a sneaking suspicion-- that MMT advocates don't calculate "Inflation" the same way I do.

Assume a can of tuna costs $1. And one year later, it costs $1.25. To me, that's 25% annual inflation. When tuna costs $10, that's 1,000% inflation.
And, to me, it doesn't matter how many dollars there are in the entire world... it's still 1,000% inflation.


I thiiink the MMT'ers start with:

$1 for 1 can of tuna. And let's say there are only $100 dollars in the entire world.
Now if the MMT'ers print 900 more dollars... and the can of tuna goes-up to $10... I'm pretty sure they would say that's Zero Inflation-- because the ratio of total-dollars-in-circulation to the price-in-dollars for a can of tuna... has remained constant:

$1perCan/100totalDollars = $10perCan/$1000totalDollars.

The 'best part', according to Socialists, is the potential for Equity via Wealth Redistribution.

Remember how Obama said: " “If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen."




So if you worked hard & saved your money & your retirement pension is invested in 'safe' US Treasuries... then the New York Times' 1619 project says you stole everything you have from black slaves.

And so it's perfectly-kosher if it no longer costs you One Dollar of your retirement money to buy a can of tuna, but-- by the time you retire-- it costs Ten Bucks. You've been 'taxed' at a rate of 90%, but since it isn't CALLED a tax, the MMT people *say* your money wasn't taxed. And besides: You DESERVED it. Your time and labor and ingenuity were never yours. It all belongs to the state. And by state, I don't mean individual US states. Little known fact: the currency US states use is issued by the Federal government. With the except of Oklahoma. Offer not valid in California or Alaska.

And whatabout that $900 they printed? Well that was 'created' by crediting that much money into the accounts of MMTer's friends: in the form of Slavery Reparations for Trans-Blax, and Free-College-And-HealthCare-And-Moustache-Rides For Whoever Shows Up At The Border, & 10% for the Big Guy.

But-- as long as the ratio of price-inflation-to-money-printing remains constant... it's all perfectly kosher. Because, you see, "The Quantity Theory of Money Has Been Discredited." --Kiwi.

What are you, some kinda racist sexist KKK Quantity-Theory-Of-Money bigot ?!! What part of Equity don't you Understaaaaand ?!!!

But what-if... in the Brave New MMT world of $1,000 in circulation... the price of tuna were to rise to $12.50 ?

Well that WOULD be considered 25% inflation, according to the MMT'ers. (And certainly NOT 1250% inflation, naturally).

And the solution would be to implement a TAX of offset the rise. And the precise formula of precisely-what to tax & precisely-how to tax it...

in order to restore perfect balance with Zero MMT-style Inflation...

well

I'll

leave

that

'simple'

problem

as

an

exercise

for

the

reader.


HelpingHand
.
.
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 11:17 am

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1367

Post by HelpingHand »

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/18/us/chauv ... index.html

Nope. No intimidation for not being on the right side of history here. Any juror who heard of this is wondering really really hard about choosing their own well being and just voting guilty.


KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5421
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1369

Post by KiwiInOz »

At first reading one could be compelled by Murphy’s review of Stephanie Kelton’s The Deficit Myth. But to paraphrase him “The bad news is that Robert Murphy has written a review of a book on MMT that is very readable and will strike many readers as persuasive and clever”. In reality it is somewhat of a Gish Gallop, an argument from incredulity, and conflation of ought with is.

In his introductory paragraphs he states:
So why is this bad news? Because Kelton’s concrete policy proposals would be an absolute disaster. Her message can be boiled down to two sentences (and these are my words, not an exact quotation): Because the Federal Reserve has the legal ability to print an unlimited number of dollars, we should stop worrying about how the government will “pay for” the various spending programs the public desires. If they print too much money we will experience high inflation, but Uncle Sam doesn’t need to worry about “finding the money” the same way a household or business does.

This is an incredibly dangerous message to be injecting into the American discourse...
He is saying that the American public cannot be trusted with the secret knowledge of how the monetary system works because otherwise they might start demanding public investment in policies that will actually benefit them (in the way that corporate lobbyists do). It is funny how Government expenditure is seen to be an unaffordable boondoggle when its target is the least well off, and good for everybody when its target is the increased accumulation of wealth by the already wealthy.

It is almost as if he does not trust the political system to apply (economic, social, or environmental) cost-benefit analysis to allocation of spending and would just hand out dollops of cash to the loudest voices or those with the greatest electoral clout.

I will look at each of his sections in turn and attempt to pull out the nub of his criticism. I will split them into separate posts to avoid tl:dr syndrome (and because I do actually have other things to do).

Under Monetary Sovereignty he says”
The insistence on countries issuing debt in their own currency helps to explain away awkward cases such as Venezuela, which is suffering from hyperinflation and yet has the ability to issue its own currency. The answer (from an MMT perspective) is that Venezuela had a large proportion of its foreign-held debt denominated in US dollars, rather than the bolivar, and hence the Venezuelan government couldn’t simply print its way out of the hole. In contrast, goes the MMT argument, the US government owes its debts in US dollars, and so never need worry about a fiscal crisis.
This is a classic case of misdirection. MMT does not say that a country which issues debt in its own currency cannot experience hyperinflation. A country can be driven to its knees by piss poor internal political decisions and/or by pressure from more powerful countries.

He inadvertently answers his rhetorical question (as per MMT), that the Venezuelan Government has debts in US dollars. Many developing countries such as Venezuela are indebted in US dollars because they signed up to “development loans”. They are required to pay back the loans in US dollars (which they cannot issue) and not their own currency. They are caught in a trap where US corporates (backed by the State Department and CIA) now have access to their political systems and natural resources and can ensure that they stay indebted by driving down the value of the currency (which was pegged to the US dollar) so that they can never pay back the loans.

This is empirically demonstrable. It is not conspiracy.

Venezuela was able to make its payments when the price of oil was booming but chose to sell Venezuelan bolivars for US dollars on international currency exchanges when the price of oil plummeted. The national currency massively deflated when speculators drove the price of US dollars up and the Venezuelan Government pushed more money into that market.

The money “printed” was not spent into the economy to stimulate it. The situation would be vastly different had they spent their own currency on investing in infrastructure rather than borrowing it. They believed that they were financially constrained and acted accordingly.

In a nutshell, the hyperinflation in Venezuela has been caused by foreign debt servicing collapsing the exchange rate. And recent economic sanctions have focussed on weakening their oil industry. I wonder why that is.

And I'll come back to the last sentence in the previous quote just before I finish:
In contrast, goes the MMT argument, the US government owes its debts in US dollars, and so never need worry about a fiscal crisis.
This is right. The US dollar has been the "gold standard" for a long time and the US Government has never borrowed money from other countries in their currency. Further, any country wishing to invest in the USA has to do it in US dollars, i.e. they have to buy US dollars at whatever the exchange rate for their currency is before they can invest.

The US Government can buy any good or service (including bond buy backs with interest - aka corporate welfare) in the country in its own currency as and when it chooses to do so without having to borrow it or have cash reserves.

Here endeth Part 1.

Keating
.
.
Posts: 2213
Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2015 3:18 pm
Location: South of anteater guy

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1370

Post by Keating »


Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1371

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Babylon Bee is hitting them out of the park:

Judge Asks Jurors To Disregard Maxine Waters As She Pours Gasoline On Their Heads

Surely because of my many BB shares, Fuckerberg keeps suggesting Onion articles. Wokeness kills humor. The Onion is about on par with Bjart Foshhaug at this point.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1372

Post by Service Dog »

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com ... %3DApi&f=1
KiwiInOz wrote:
He is saying that the American public cannot be trusted with the secret knowledge of how the monetary system works because otherwise they might start demanding public investment in policies that will actually benefit them (in the way that corporate lobbyists do). It is funny how Government expenditure is seen to be an unaffordable boondoggle when its target is the least well off, and good for everybody when its target is the increased accumulation of wealth by the already wealthy.

It is almost as if he does not trust the political system to apply (economic, social, or environmental) cost-benefit analysis to allocation of spending and would just hand out dollops of cash to the loudest voices or those with the greatest electoral clout.

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1373

Post by Service Dog »

Hmm... let me try to post that again...

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1374

Post by Service Dog »

https://external-content.duckduckgo.com ... %3DApi&f=1
KiwiInOz wrote:
He is saying that the American public cannot be trusted with the secret knowledge of how the monetary system works because otherwise they might start demanding public investment in policies that will actually benefit them (in the way that corporate lobbyists do). It is funny how Government expenditure is seen to be an unaffordable boondoggle when its target is the least well off, and good for everybody when its target is the increased accumulation of wealth by the already wealthy.

It is almost as if he does not trust the political system to apply (economic, social, or environmental) cost-benefit analysis to allocation of spending and would just hand out dollops of cash to the loudest voices or those with the greatest electoral clout.
No, Kathy Neuman, you aren't paraphrasing Bob Murphy correctly & you're not mind-reading correctly.

Bob Murphy isn't Red Skull & you won't convince anybody he-is... for the same reason we know Jordan Peterson ain't either.

Bob Murphy is a known quantity. He's got hundreds of hours of podcasts online & he's a chill conversational guy-- whose views are no secret.

He's NOT a shill for The Fed or the Military-Industrial Complex status quo-- or the US State Dept & World Bank hijinks-- that ensnared places like Venezuela into crushing debt repayment obligations. Bob Murphy is much more of a Ron Paul 'End The Fed' guy. And not-only is he skeptical of MMT-- he doesn't even like the 'normal' stimulus and cooling-off attempts of butchers like Greenspan & Bernake-- butchers claiming to be surgeons.

=

You're making an ass of yourself, Kiwi. Your trademark one-two punch is to open with a haughty demeanor "Pearls Before Swine!"... and follow it up with a complete failure to outclass the swine you're sneering-down-at.

I recommend you listen to Michael Malice & Tom Woods discussing 'How To Make Radical Ideas Approachable'.

Or even just the part around 8min23sec, where they talk about 2 types of people Reacting To ideas outside-their-comfort-zone.

The first type may be skeptical, as in "I have my doubts, how exactly would such a far-fetched thing possibly work?"

Sadly, the second type reacts by giving a little KiwiInOz speech-- regurgitating their pre-existing assumptions, to ward-away the dangerous new idea which threatens their Self Image as a Very Smart Person.

https://youtu.be/k0jdavqhZe4?t=500

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1375

Post by Service Dog »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: Judge Asks Jurors To Disregard Maxine Waters As She Pours Gasoline On Their Heads
Celebrity Influencer and Human Hashtag Barak Obama tweeted about "the heart-wrenching murder of George Floyd" 5 days ago, as the trial was in-progress. And a new round of riots and looting was in-progress.

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8052
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1376

Post by AndrewV69 »

Meanwhile :


Bhurzum
Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
Posts: 4516
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
Location: Lurking in a dumpster

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1377

Post by Bhurzum »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote: The Onion is about on par with Bjart Foshhaug at this point.
Aaaah...them were the days!

http://slymepit.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=376&start=120


Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 6327
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm
Location: Trash Island

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1379

Post by Service Dog »

MMT claims that governments can print as much money as they please, with no consequence, until the point that full employment is reached.

To this I say: Rebecca Watson, Melody Hensley, Richard Carrier, Heina Dadabhoy...

There's not enough zeros in all the bank accounts in all the world, to make them do an honest day's work.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 13682
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The 3FJ, Matt, & Dog Conspiracy Show

#1380

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

AndrewV69 wrote: Meanwhile :

Established in 1953, the Humanist of the Year Award is conferred annually by the American Humanist Association (AHA), recognizing the awardee as an exemplar of humanist values. Communication of scientific concepts to the public is an important aspect of advancing the cause of humanism. Richard Dawkins was honored in 1996 by the AHA as Humanist of the Year for his significant contributions in this area.

Regrettably, Richard Dawkins has over the past several years accumulated a history of making statements that use the guise of scientific discourse to demean marginalized groups, an approach antithetical to humanist values. His latest statement implies that the identities of transgender individuals are fraudulent, while also simultaneously attacking Black identity as one that can be assumed when convenient. His subsequent attempts at clarification are inadequate and convey neither sensitivity nor sincerity.

Consequently, the AHA Board has concluded that Richard Dawkins is no longer deserving of being honored by the AHA, and has voted to withdraw, effective immediately, the 1996 Humanist of the Year award.
https://americanhumanist.org/news/ameri ... d-dawkins/

AHA is a collection of perpetually butthurt freaks and miserable feminazis.

Post Reply