Australian Politics Forum - Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #825 - Mar 18^th, 2024 at 10:58am

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Frank wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 9:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 7:35am:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 3:13pm:

So who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?

TGD: Er...politicians (whether elected, or in a consensus meritocracy).

Quote:

How do you get consensus (agreement with) if not by some election, ie SHOWING, EXPRESSING agreement with?

The important thing - to bring you back on topic - is to acknowledge that politicians decide what the community needs, not the invisible hand.

...whether the community expresses it by a 50% + 1 vote, as in a democracy, or by consensus of chosen officials, as in China.

Huge difference.

Yes, but that is beside the point, namely:

Q: "who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?"

A: politicians intervening in the 'invisible hand'.

It matters hugely whether the politicians have the mandate - not just the power - or not to make decisions for everyone.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide Gold Member Offline Australian Politics<br /> Posts: 12923 Gender:	Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) Reply #826 - Mar 18^th, 2024 at 6:23pm wombatwoody wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 2:10am: All Wars Are Bankers' Wars Yes, when the privilege of creating money resides with private bankers, the unknowing population can be easily duped into going to war.
Back to top	IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #827 - Mar 18^th, 2024 at 6:34pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 6:23pm:

wombatwoody wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 2:10am:

All Wars Are Bankers' Wars

Yes, when the privilege of creating money resides with private bankers, the unknowing population can be easily duped into going to war.

Very silly.

The Roman Empire, the Persian Empire, the Chinese Empire, the Inca and Aztecs and all the rest - all about Jooo bankers.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #828 - Mar 19^th, 2024 at 9:03am

Frank wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 6:34pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 6:23pm:

wombatwoody wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 2:10am:

All Wars Are Bankers' Wars

Yes, when the privilege of creating money resides with private bankers, the unknowing population can be easily duped into going to war.

Very silly.

The Roman Empire, the Persian Empire, the Chinese Empire, the Inca and Aztecs and all the rest - all about Jooo bankers.

Ok, I didn't watch the video, I didn't have "Jooo bankers" in mind.

But allowing the privilege of creating money to remain solely in the hands of private financiers is one of the great catastrophes of modern finance.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #829 - Mar 19^th, 2024 at 9:12am

Frank wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 10:58am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Frank wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 9:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 7:35am:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 3:13pm:

So who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?

TGD: Er...politicians (whether elected, or in a consensus meritocracy).

Quote:

How do you get consensus (agreement with) if not by some election, ie SHOWING, EXPRESSING agreement with?

The important thing - to bring you back on topic - is to acknowledge that politicians decide what the community needs, not the invisible hand.

...whether the community expresses it by a 50% + 1 vote, as in a democracy, or by consensus of chosen officials, as in China.

Huge difference.

Yes, but that is beside the point, namely:

Q: "who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?"

A: politicians intervening in the 'invisible hand'.

It matters hugely whether the politicians have the mandate - not just the power - or not to make decisions for everyone.

Why?

Pollies - whether by election or consensus - must intervene in the self-interested 'invisible hand', for the sake of the wider public.

And a consensus based on the proposition that shared prosperity is more important than the outcomes from unbridled competition alone (via 'the invisible hand'), is obviously better for everyone.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #830 - Mar 19^th, 2024 at 10:50am

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 9:12am:

Frank wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 10:58am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Frank wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 9:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 7:35am:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 3:13pm:

So who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?

TGD: Er...politicians (whether elected, or in a consensus meritocracy).

Quote:

How do you get consensus (agreement with) if not by some election, ie SHOWING, EXPRESSING agreement with?

The important thing - to bring you back on topic - is to acknowledge that politicians decide what the community needs, not the invisible hand.

...whether the community expresses it by a 50% + 1 vote, as in a democracy, or by consensus of chosen officials, as in China.

Huge difference.

Yes, but that is beside the point, namely:

Q: "who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?"

A: politicians intervening in the 'invisible hand'.

It matters hugely whether the politicians have the mandate - not just the power - or not to make decisions for everyone.

Why?

Pollies - whether by election or consensus - must intervene in the self-interested 'invisible hand', for the sake of the wider public.

And a consensus based on the proposition that shared prosperity is more important than the outcomes from unbridled competition alone (via 'the invisible hand'), is obviously better for everyone.

Competition is not unabridged anywhere except p pieces like Haiti.

Common prosperity is a slogan with little content. Welfare safety net is a better, more meaningful expression. Australia and Western Europe already has it to a much greater degree than China.

Mandate matters because a society, a country is about its people, not about its government. The people's consent to be governed is the mandate, reviewed periodically.

You would enjoy the tizz you'd be in if you listened to Niall Ferguson's Reith Lectures from 2012.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02p8xh7/episodes/downloads

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #831 - Mar 20^th, 2024 at 10:00am

Frank wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 10:50am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 19^th, 2024 at 9:12am:

Frank wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 10:58am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 18^th, 2024 at 9:58am:

Frank wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 9:15am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 16^th, 2024 at 7:35am:

Frank wrote on Mar 15^th, 2024 at 3:13pm:

So who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?

TGD: Er...politicians (whether elected, or in a consensus meritocracy).

Quote:

How do you get consensus (agreement with) if not by some election, ie SHOWING, EXPRESSING agreement with?

The important thing - to bring you back on topic - is to acknowledge that politicians decide what the community needs, not the invisible hand.

...whether the community expresses it by a 50% + 1 vote, as in a democracy, or by consensus of chosen officials, as in China.

Huge difference.

Yes, but that is beside the point, namely:

Q: "who decides what the community needs, if not the invisible hand?"

A: politicians intervening in the 'invisible hand'.

It matters hugely whether the politicians have the mandate - not just the power - or not to make decisions for everyone.

Why?

Pollies - whether by election or consensus - must intervene in the self-interested 'invisible hand', for the sake of the wider public.

And a consensus based on the proposition that shared prosperity is more important than the outcomes from unbridled competition alone (via 'the invisible hand'), is obviously better for everyone.

Competition is not unabridged anywhere except p pieces like Haiti.

Competition is unbridled in pure 'invisible hand' markets, by definition (the outcome of all the self-interested players in the market)

Such markets need intervention by policicans - to the degree determined by the pollies.

Quote:

Common prosperity is a slogan with little content.

No, it means shared prosperity, ie no systemic unemployment and entrenched poverty.

Quote:

Welfare safety net is a better, more meaningful expression. Australia and Western Europe already has it to a much greater degree than China.

google

"People in households relying on JobSeeker were $269 per week below the poverty line, and people in households relying on parenting payment were $246 per week below the poverty line.22 Mar 2023

Hence NOT shared prosperity in Oz (and you are blind to the people sleeping in city streets).

Quote:

Mandate matters because a society, a country is about its people, not about its government. The people's consent to be governed is the mandate, reviewed periodically.

Government is necessary to avoid chaos ...and hopefully, to engender shared prosperity. In productive societies poverty is a political choice, not an economic law.

Quote:

You would enjoy the tizz you'd be in if you listened to Niall Ferguson's Reith Lectures from 2012.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02p8xh7/episodes/downloads

Niall Ferguson is a deluded 'natural individual rights' ideologue.

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #832 - Mar 20^th, 2024 at 2:20pm

Steven Hail sums up the three core statements at the heart of MMT:

1. Monetary sovereign governments face no purely financial budget constraints.

2. All economies, and all governments, face real and ecological limits relating to what can be produced and consumed.

3. The federal government’s financial deficit is everybody else’s financial surplus.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #833 - Mar 20^th, 2024 at 3:01pm

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 2:20pm:

Steven Hail sums up the three core statements at the heart of MMT:

1. Monetary sovereign governments face no purely financial budget constraints.

2. All economies, and all governments, face real and ecological limits relating to what can be produced and consumed.

3. The federal government’s financial deficit is everybody else’s financial surplus.

He sounds like an economist... Cheesy

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #834 - Mar 21^st, 2024 at 9:05am

Frank wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 3:01pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 2:20pm:

Steven Hail sums up the three core statements at the heart of MMT:

1. Monetary sovereign governments face no purely financial budget constraints.

2. All economies, and all governments, face real and ecological limits relating to what can be produced and consumed.

3. The federal government’s financial deficit is everybody else’s financial surplus.

He sounds like an economist... Cheesy

With a vision, freeing governements from 'austerity', rather than following the mainstream government debt and defict mythology.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #835 - Mar 21^st, 2024 at 9:28am

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 10:00am:

Competition is unbridled in pure 'invisible hand' markets, by definition (the outcome of all the self-interested players in the market)

Such markets need intervention by policicans - to the degree determined by the pollies.

There is no "unbridled pure invisible hand markets" (whatever the hell that might mean) anywhere in liberal democracies. You are fighting against an empty cliche of your own and the CCP's devising. Your are pitting your complete ignorance against your complete misunderstanding.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #836 - Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:08am

Frank wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 9:28am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 10:00am:

Competition is unbridled in pure 'invisible hand' markets, by definition (the outcome of all the self-interested players in the market)

Such markets need intervention by policicans - to the degree determined by the pollies.

There is no "unbridled pure invisible hand markets" (whatever the hell that might mean) anywhere in liberal democracies.

The 'invisible hand' is the very basis of neoliberal economics in 'liberal democracies'.

The invisible hand is a metaphor for how, in a free market economy, self-interested individuals operate through a system of mutual interdependence. This interdependence incentivizes producers to make what is socially necessary, even though they may care only about their own well-being.

"Whatever that means" ....means you have zero knowledge of economic dogmas in the various economic schools.

Just as you tried to claim the 'welfare safety net' attains common prosperity, which I was easily able to disprove: the "safety net" is well below the poverty line.

Keep trying; your ignorance will become evident to everyone.

This entire thread (now many pages) can enlighten you, but you are satisfied with your ignorance.

Deplorable.

Quote:

You are fighting against an empty cliche of your own and the CCP's devising. Your are pitting your complete ignorance against your complete misunderstanding.

In short......."it's mirror time"....

Back to top

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #837 - Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:13am

https://billmitchell.org/blog/?p=61638

Central banker going off the planet

........

While a lot of attention was placed on the Bank of Japan’s decision yesterday, another former central banker and now chief executive of the Bank for International Settlements was demonstrating his willingness to enforce the mainstream fictions about public debt etc.

It is interesting that these so-called ‘independent’ central bankers think they have the scope to make commentary about fiscal matters, which are inately political matters.

But, of course, the ‘independence’ of the central banks is just another aspect of the ficitonal world that the mainstream economists have created to depoliticise economic decision making and make it harder for policy makers to be politically accountable to the voting public.

Anyway, Agustin Carstens gave a speech – Trust and macroeconomic stability: a virtuous circle – in Germany on March 18, 2024 and spun the usual scare claims about public debt, inflation etc.

Among other things he said that:

"… it is imperative for fiscal authorities to curb the relentless rise in public debt … the days of ultra-low rates are over. Fiscal authorities have a narrow window in which to get their house in order before the public’s trust in their commitments starts to fray. As I pointed out earlier, financial markets can remain calm in the face of large imbalances until suddenly, one day, they no longer are.

That is why fiscal consolidation in many economies needs to start now."

.....

So at a time when many nations are in recession or approaching that state, this bullyboy is urging governments to make that situation worse and drive unemployment up even further.

Back to top

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 46113
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #838 - Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:24am

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:08am:

Frank wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 9:28am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 10:00am:

Competition is unbridled in pure 'invisible hand' markets, by definition (the outcome of all the self-interested players in the market)

Such markets need intervention by policicans - to the degree determined by the pollies.

There is no "unbridled pure invisible hand markets" (whatever the hell that might mean) anywhere in liberal democracies.

The 'invisible hand' is the very basis of neoliberal economics in 'liberal democracies'.

The invisible hand is a metaphor for how, in a free market economy, self-interested individuals operate through a system of mutual interdependence. This interdependence incentivizes producers to make what is socially necessary, even though they may care only about their own well-being.

"Whatever that means" ....means you have zero knowledge of economic dogmas in the various economic schools.

Just as you tried to claim the 'welfare safety net' attains common prosperity, which I was easily able to disprove: the "safety net" is well below the poverty line.

Keep trying; your ignorance will become evident to everyone.

There is no 'unbridled, pure free market' anywhere except in your silly, addled head.

You are mistaking windmills for giants.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

thegreatdivide

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics 

Posts: 12923
Gender: male

Re: Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
Reply #839 - Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 10:04am

Frank wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:24am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2024 at 9:08am:

Frank wrote on Mar 21^st, 2024 at 9:28am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 20^th, 2024 at 10:00am:

Competition is unbridled in pure 'invisible hand' markets, by definition (the outcome of all the self-interested players in the market)

Such markets need intervention by policicans - to the degree determined by the pollies.

There is no "unbridled pure invisible hand markets" (whatever the hell that might mean) anywhere in liberal democracies.

The 'invisible hand' is the very basis of neoliberal economics in 'liberal democracies'.

The invisible hand is a metaphor for how, in a free market economy, self-interested individuals operate through a system of mutual interdependence. This interdependence incentivizes producers to make what is socially necessary, even though they may care only about their own well-being.

"Whatever that means" ....means you have zero knowledge of economic dogmas in the various economic schools.

Just as you tried to claim the 'welfare safety net' attains common prosperity, which I was easily able to disprove: the "safety net" is well below the poverty line.

Keep trying; your ignorance will become evident to everyone.

There is no 'unbridled, pure free market' anywhere except in your silly, addled head.

Did you miss it, suffering a catastrophic collapse in your IQ?

The 'invisible hand' is the very basis of free markets in neoliberal economies, regardless of the degree of intervention by politicians.

Quote:

You are mistaking windmills for giants.

Your error explained - again - above.

Note: to achieve shared prosperity, the 'invisible hand' has to be much more heavily regulated than at present.

Only the small Skandy countries have somewhat achieved shared prosperity in neoliberal free markets, via high taxation rather than regulation of the invisible hand, though even they are now losing social cohesion under the weight of the global refugee crises.

Back to top

IP Logged