lee wrote on Dec 4
th, 2021 at 3:04pm:
So 16 can control the world.
No. 7 or 9
permanent members, taking advice from an International Court of Justice. Note the number: the majority vote carries the day...which is the basis of
'rule of law'. Of course you, true to the sovereignty of the individual, survival of the fittest ideology, want YOUR opinion to "control the world"....whereas I am willing to submit to rule of law in my own nation; and submit to international law involving relations with other nations.
Quote:That is why Chavez turned to China, to fund his spending.. Maduro also continued to overspend after oil prices dropped.
Yes, because the IMF, the institution which should have dealt with problems arising from oil price instability - not Venezuela's fault - is an American profit-seeking stooge. The world doesn't have an effective international assistance mechanism, just as the world doesn't have an effective international rules based system...because of the delusional "freedom "values-based " BS of the West.
In fact the
US rejected Keynes proposal for a new global financial system post WW2 (see Keynes' 'clearing union' and 'bankor' concepts to deal with problems in international trade). Another example of the pernicious influence of US classical liberal ideology.
Quote:"As Chávez's successor Nicolás Maduro began to increase domestic spending after the oil price collapse, high inflation, currency controls, an unfriendly environment with private businesses, as well as the risk of default,
prevented the entrance of stronger foreign currencies into Venezuela.[5] Previously, the Chávez government turned to China to fund its overspending on social programs.[5] Despite warnings near the beginning of Chávez's tenure in the early 2000s,[1] his government continuously overspent in social spending and did not save enough money for any future economic turmoil, which Venezuela faced shortly before and after his death.[2"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez_administra... 1. "Prevented the entry of stronger foreign currencies into Venezuela " What on earth does that mean?
Foreign currencies are useless for the citizens of a given country, obviously, unless they all decide to buy a foreign currency with - what?
2. "overspending (!) on social programs"
ie Chavez should have returned to the previous status quo before the oil price collapse...... with 50% of the population living in poverty, and a tiny minority controlling the nation's wealth. ....
3. "Did not save enough money" to deal with an oil price collapse, yes...risky in a world without some sort of Keynesian scheme as mentioned above.
Your quote was obviously written by an orthodox stooge without any understanding of MMT.
Quote:Ah yes. Airships will be back in vogue.
There may be a niche for them; but:
https://supplychaindigital.com/logistics-1/boeings-new-freight-plane-runs-renewa
ble-energy
"
The biggest news surrounding this new freight plane is that Boeing will fly the plane to Paris from the United States using a renewable aviation jet fuel. The trip will mark the world’s first transatlantic crossing of a commercial jet using biologically derived fuel".
O ye of little faith...
Quote:In its entirety petal.
Now you have ceased debating the point, because you know you will lose.
Any reader can see my latter statement - which you claim represents a change of mind on my part - and which you implicitly acknowledge as correct since you can't (or haven't bothered to) find fault with it - represents my understanding of MMT which has been consistent all along.
Quote:That from 1247 my time yesterday. Oh dear the NO TAXES was from 19th November.
Wherever, or whatever time (1247?) it was from, NO TAXES refers to no taxes required in order for the currency issuer to spend debt free money... which has been the MMT revelation I have presented all along.
Have a shot at debating THAT matter, not the chronology of your misunderstanding of the concept.
Namely:
1
. The currency issuer can purchase [b]whatever is available for purchase in the nation's own currency, without taxing or borrowing from the private sector. [/b] The limit to the spending is outlined in that statement.
Quote:And yet they haven't. It is ongoing. Ask the UN.
The abolitionists won the debate in the UK parliament in the 19th century, and slavery was outlawed; and later in the 20th century, any ongoing slavery around the world is
illegal according to the UN Charter.
But guess who IS preventing the establishment of an
international rules-based system which WOULD eliminate
illegal slavery....warning: don't look in a mirror, it will shatter into a million pieces....