A timely discussion of how the economy works in China, the reasons for the West's demonization of China, and the status of MMT in China.

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5jYXB0aXZhdGUuZm0vbWFjcm9uY2hlZXNlLw/episode/ZTIzYjJmNDgtYmYzNS00NDRiLTlhOWEtOGJiMWYyZWY4YjNm?hl=en-AU&ved=2ahUKEwiqz7iAop_2AhWb7XMBHbn8BYMQieUEegQINhAL&ep=6

Examining China with an MMT Lens with Yan Liang

"Macro and Cheese explores the progressive movement through the lens of Modern Monetary Theory, with hot and irreverent political takes, spotlights in activism, and the razor sharp musings of Real Progressives Founder and host Steve Grumbine".

"This week’s episode is another chapter in our mission to educate ourselves about modern China. Yan Liang specializes in Modern Money Theory, international trade and finance, and economic development, with a special regional focus on China. She is also the wife of friend-of-the-podcast Eric Tymoigne".

"Steve and Yan discuss the truth and misconceptions about the ongoing competition between the US and China. It has created winners and losers, with the working class in both countries affected by globalization. Trade war is class war."

(Spurts of aggressive punk music cease after c.1 mim.)

`The Great Firewall (GFW; simplified Chinese: 防火长城; traditional Chinese: 防火長城; pinyin: Fánghuǒ Chángchéng) is the combination of legislative actions and technologies enforced by the People's Republic of China to regulate the Internet domestically. Its role in internet censorship in China is to block access to selected foreign websites and to slow down cross-border internet traffic.[1] The effect includes: limiting access to foreign information sources, blocking foreign internet tools (e.g. Google Search,[2] Facebook,[3] Twitter,[4] Wikipedia,[5][6] and others) and mobile apps, and requiring foreign companies to adapt to domestic regulations.[7][8]

Besides censorship, the GFW has also influenced the development of China's internal internet economy by nurturing domestic companies[9] and reducing the effectiveness of products from foreign internet companies.[10] The techniques deployed by the Chinese government to maintain control of the Great Firewall can include modifying search results for terms, such as they did following Ai Weiwei’s arrest, and petitioning global conglomerates to remove content, as happened when they petitioned Apple to remove the Quartz business news publication’s app from its Chinese App Store after reporting on the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests.[11][12]

The Great Firewall was formerly operated by the SIIO, as part of the Golden Shield Project. Since 2013, the firewall is technically operated by the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), which is the entity in charge of translating the Chinese Communist Party's doctrine and policy into technical specifications.[13]

As mentioned in the "one country, two systems" principle, China's special administrative regions (SARs) such as Hong Kong and Macau are not affected by the firewall, as SARs have their own governmental and legal systems and therefore enjoy a higher degree of autonomy. Nevertheless, the U.S. State Department has reported that the central government authorities have closely monitored Internet use in these regions,[14] and Hong Kong's National Security Law has been used to block websites documenting anti-government protests.[15]

The term Great Firewall of China is a combination of the word firewall with the Great Wall of China, and was first used by Australian Sinologist Geremie Barmé in 1997.[16][17]

Hello Shill.

Do your censors let you read that?

The Sum Of The Freeze Is Equal To The Removal Of The Balls Of The Russian Interloper.

The founder of Real Progressives,  who hosted the pod-cast in the OP, is one Steve Grumbine, whose journey from Conservative Reagan disciple to MMT convert is informative, especially his own experience of "pulling yourself up by the bootstraps", as per Conservative dogma:

https://realprogressives.org/our-founder-steven-d-grumbine/

"In 2009, despite his many years within the company, Steve was laid off due to the global financial crisis. Steve, with all his advanced professional education and experience, found himself unemployed for 18 months, and no amount of bootstrap pulling could lift him out".

"He experienced firsthand the struggles of no longer having secure employment with benefits, while at the same time dealing with a costly divorce, massive child support, and lapsing ability to make mortgage payments".

Black is the colour of Money.
The Black Market is the oldest in history.
Takes a Black Man to run an Economy for a billion little Yellow people. :D

Jasin wrote on Feb 28^th, 2022 at 10:26pm:

Black is the colour of Money. The Black Market is the oldest in history.

Money is  the oldest delusion in the world; it is always created out of nothing, yet people still think it's a commodity. 


Quote:

Takes a Black Man to run an Economy for a billion little Yellow people. :D

Geopolitical forces manipulated by self-interest  have always pulled the purse strings.

But the money delusion's days are numbered. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 1^st, 2022 at 8:12am:

Jasin wrote on Feb 28th, 2022 at 10:26pm: Black is the colour of Money. The Black Market is the oldest in history. Money is  the oldest delusion in the world; it is always created out of nothing, yet people still think it's a commodity.  Quote: Takes a Black Man to run an Economy for a billion little Yellow people. :D Geopolitical forces manipulated by self-interest  have always pulled the purse strings. But the money delusion's days are numbered.

Complete garbaga, again.

Money is a symbol of value. You could carry physical objects with you to exchange them for other physical objects but it would be cumbersome in the extreme. It is easier and better to have a unit of measure for the value of various objects and services and exchange that measure (money).

By your idiotic reckoning other measures - metre, hectare, ton, etc  - are delusions because they are also ultimately random measures of real thing, length,  adea, weight etc

Frank wrote on Mar 1^st, 2022 at 4:00pm:

Complete garbaga, again. Money is a symbol of value.

Correct, but yet, crucially, money is created out of nothing, so exactly what 'value' (in the quantitative sense)  does it have?


Quote:

You could carry physical objects with you to exchange them for other physical objects but it would be cumbersome in the extreme. It is easier and better to have a unit of measure for the value of various objects and services and exchange that measure (money).

Of course, where did I say otherwise?  But you are now straying into the question of "what determines 'value'"?


Quote:

By your idiotic reckoning other measures - metre, hectare, ton, etc  - are delusions because they are also ultimately random measures of real thing, length,  adea, weight etc

They are not random measures,  because they are defined, whereas any attempt to define the 'value' of money is impossible because such value would need to be be defined in terms of itself, being created out of thin air whereas hectares, tons, metres are not created, they are defined. And neither are commodities eg, gold,  created out of thin air. But the 'value' of gold measured in money, - or vice versa - is not fixed

Interestingly, anthropologists agree money is primarily a means to establish  state sovereignty; its use as a medium of exchange is incidental to the state's issuance of money to establish state sovereignty over its own citizens. 

For example, the Roman empire initiated  the  first use of money in Britain;  the much simpler economy of the illiterate natives had no need of money because the tribes governed themselves according to defined roles for everyone, not requiring state governance.   

Until the middle of the 19th century, privately owned banks in Great Britain and Ireland were free to issue their own banknotes. Paper currency issued by a wide range of provincial and town banking companies in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland circulated freely as a means of payment. - Wiki

GD is right, but so is Frank.

Digital money is now created out of nothing.
...and when Cyber War starts - everyone's money that is in that 'invisible' world, will indeed, dissapear... like a cashless society that it is.

Far cheaper to be mugged in an alleyway,
than it is online.

Interesting post from Australia's leading MMT economist prof. Bill  Mitchell.

http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=49327

The IMF shows us that the central bank monetary financing taboo has no substance

Note: Mitchell observes that the IMF seems to acknowledge  the 'taboo' of the CB creating money as such, but the final two sentences reveal the conventional paranoia: 

"Which means that all the hype that surrounds the ‘taboo’ about the private sector fearing inflation if the government acts in this way is based on nothing substantive.

"But that doesn’t stop the IMF falling back into lockstep with the fiction (that CB money creation will cause inflation)  when they conclude that “departures from central bank independence can be very dangerous … [and have] … devastating effects on economies and livelihoods”.

So fear will force endless austerity on the population, austerity which negatively affects the poor the most, as governments attempt to pay back covid debt and rein in inflation. 

Note a pernicious thesis  of classical economics:

unlimited desires in the face of limited resources.

But socialism suggests satisfying basic needs is possible, ie choices re allocation of resources can be made.  Unemployment and homelessness are government choices, not some natural economic law.

Mainstream economics considers money to be a scarce commodity, it is not; whereas  some resources may be in short supply at certain times, money need never be in short supply for currency-issuing governments. 

The mainstream quantity theory of money is false, more money in the economy will cause inflation only if resource supply is constrained.

More money in the economy will create economic  growth, not inflation, if available resources and productive capacity can absorb the extra spending.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 1:17pm:

Note a pernicious thesis  of classical economics: unlimited desires in the face of limited resources. But socialism suggests satisfying basic needs is possible, ie choices re allocation of resources can be made.  Unemployment and homelessness are government choices, not some natural economic law. Mainstream economics considers money to be a scarce commodity, it is not; whereas  some resources may be in short supply at certain times, money need never be in short supply for currency-issuing governments.  The mainstream quantity theory of money is false, more money in the economy will cause inflation only if resource supply is constrained. More money in the economy will create economic  growth, not inflation, if available resources and productive capacity can absorb the extra spending.

Dear God you're full of nothing but googled shyte!

MMT was incorporated by Keynesian economics.

Frank wrote on Mar 1^st, 2022 at 4:00pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 1st, 2022 at 8:12am: Jasin wrote on Feb 28th, 2022 at 10:26pm: Black is the colour of Money. The Black Market is the oldest in history. Money is  the oldest delusion in the world; it is always created out of nothing, yet people still think it's a commodity.  Quote: Takes a Black Man to run an Economy for a billion little Yellow people. :D Geopolitical forces manipulated by self-interest  have always pulled the purse strings. But the money delusion's days are numbered.  Complete garbaga, again. Money is a symbol of value. You could carry physical objects with you to exchange them for other physical objects but it would be cumbersome in the extreme. It is easier and better to have a unit of measure for the value of various objects and services and exchange that measure (money). By your idiotic reckoning other measures - metre, hectare, ton, etc  - are delusions because they are also ultimately random measures of real thing, length,  adea, weight etc

It's Bwian googling his way into irrelevance.

I knew I'd seen his googled stuff before.


"The post-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley said that MMT is largely a restatement of elementary Keynesian economics, but prone to "over-simplistic analysis" and understating the risks of its policy implications."

It's just simplistic BS. So of course it blends in well with the multi troll Notsogreat who has spent weeks on here copying and pasting slabs of an online website re MMT.

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 1:56pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 7th, 2022 at 1:17pm: Note a pernicious thesis  of classical economics: unlimited desires in the face of limited resources. But socialism suggests satisfying basic needs is possible, ie choices re allocation of resources can be made.  Unemployment and homelessness are government choices, not some natural economic law. Mainstream economics considers money to be a scarce commodity, it is not; whereas  some resources may be in short supply at certain times, money need never be in short supply for currency-issuing governments.  The mainstream quantity theory of money is false, more money in the economy will cause inflation only if resource supply is constrained. More money in the economy will create economic  growth, not inflation, if available resources and productive capacity can absorb the extra spending. Dear God you're full of nothing but googled shyte! MMT was incorporated by Keynesian economics.

Keynes, in a letter to fellow economist James Meade written in April 1943, said of Lerner, “His argument is impeccable. But heaven help anyone who tries to put it across”.

Abba Lerner espoused 'functional finance' which was a forerunner of MMT, so in fact both Keynes and MMT are related to Lerner's 'functional finance' ideas.   

But yes.....I can see what Keynes was getting at; money-is-a-scarce-commodity flat-earthers like yourself will always be difficult to enlighten.

As mentioned at the start of this Guardian article: 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/18/truth-money-iou-bank-of-england-austerity

"Back in the 1930s, Henry Ford is supposed to have remarked that it was a good thing that most Americans didn't know how banking really works, because if they did, "there'd be a revolution before tomorrow morning".


That was during the GD of course, when unemployment  was being prolonged unnecessarily by the Fed's monetary policies. 

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 2:05pm:

"The post-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley said that MMT is largely a restatement of elementary Keynesian economics, but prone to "over-simplistic analysis" and understating the risks of its policy implications."

Palley himself here is guilty of "over simplistic analysis" of MMT, and overstating "the risks of its policy implications".   

A debater needs to specify the points being critiqued, obviously.

And as for mainstream attacks on MMT,  economist James Galbraith sums it up  brilliantly:

https://www.jordantimes.com/opinion/james-k-galbraith/whos-afraid-mmt

"Who's afraid of MMT?"

As anyone who has ever been responsible for legislative oversight of central bankers knows, they do not like to have their authority challenged. Most of all, they will defend their mystique, that magical aura that hovers over their words, shrouding a slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.

As a result, tormenting central bankers is great fun. John Maynard Keynes famously tormented Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England (BOE) from 1920 to 1944. Wright Patman and Henry Reuss, two US congressmen who chaired the House Banking Committee in the 1970s, did the same to Federal Reserve Chair Arthur Burns. I know that Reuss enjoyed it; I assisted him at the time.

In our day, the voices of Modern Monetary Theory perturb the sleep not only of present central bankers, but even of those retired from the role. They prowl the corridors like Lady Macbeth, shouting “Out damn spot!”


Hence we have Lisa, playing the role of Lady Macbeth, with her following remarks:


Quote:

It's just simplistic BS. So of course it blends in well with the multi troll Notsogreat who has spent weeks on here copying and pasting slabs of an online website re MMT.

" - - - slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.”

The banking industry can be accused of that but to assume any branch of the much wider network of game players involved in currency/shares/bonds etc is honest or in full control of today’s market procedures is no more than wishful  thinking.
Instance. Automated digital share trading, hybridised with a mongrel mix of totally opaque bitcoin trading is now beyond control of any single govt or financial institution. On the other hand some say it’s an improvement not having the lunatics run the asylum but who is ?
 

"the West's demonisation of China" There, right at the git-go, you know the opinions are going to be propaganda. It's got nothing to do with MMT. It is about making the policies of the Chinese police state seem benign. Never mind an autocratic, secretive, extra-judiciary government whose number one purpose is to its own perpetuation. Never mind censorship, copyrights, and dumping. And don't mention the bogus claim that the above named government has some "right" to take Taiwan by force, because it happened to on the mainland.

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 3:56pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 7th, 2022 at 2:05pm: "The post-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley said that MMT is largely a restatement of elementary Keynesian economics, but prone to "over-simplistic analysis" and understating the risks of its policy implications." Palley himself here is guilty of "over simplistic analysis" of MMT, and overstating "the risks of its policy implications".

Says who? You? A notorious multi troll who only knows how to Google? Pffft!

Next!

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 2:05pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 1st, 2022 at 4:00pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 1st, 2022 at 8:12am: Jasin wrote on Feb 28th, 2022 at 10:26pm: Black is the colour of Money. The Black Market is the oldest in history. Money is  the oldest delusion in the world; it is always created out of nothing, yet people still think it's a commodity.  Quote: Takes a Black Man to run an Economy for a billion little Yellow people. :D Geopolitical forces manipulated by self-interest  have always pulled the purse strings. But the money delusion's days are numbered.  Complete garbaga, again. Money is a symbol of value. You could carry physical objects with you to exchange them for other physical objects but it would be cumbersome in the extreme. It is easier and better to have a unit of measure for the value of various objects and services and exchange that measure (money). By your idiotic reckoning other measures - metre, hectare, ton, etc  - are delusions because they are also ultimately random measures of real thing, length,  adea, weight etc It's Bwian googling his way into irrelevance. I knew I'd seen his googled stuff before. "The post-Keynesian economist Thomas Palley said that MMT is largely a restatement of elementary Keynesian economics, but prone to "over-simplistic analysis" and understating the risks of its policy implications." It's just simplistic BS. So of course it blends in well with the multi troll Notsogreat who has spent weeks on here copying and pasting slabs of an online website re MMT.

Please look up the googled links provided by Notsogreat.

They actually support my post.

Ayn Marx wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 4:51pm:

" - - - slushy mix of banality and baloney in a mist of power and jargon.” The banking industry can be accused of that but to assume any branch of the much wider network of game players involved in currency/shares/bonds etc is honest or in full control of today’s market procedures is no more than wishful  thinking. Instance. Automated digital share trading, hybridised with a mongrel mix of totally opaque bitcoin trading is now beyond control of any single govt or financial institution. On the other hand some say it’s an improvement not having the lunatics run the asylum but who is ?

Good points, you are referring to the financialization of capitalism which according to Michael Hudson will lead to the collapse of the US by mid century, as China's  rise based on its real economy (infrastructure, industrial automation and AI) out-competes the US FIRE-based  economy (finance, insurance, real-estate).

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XvWoBhd7X4

As for Bitcoin: it is the ultimate expression of anti-government - 'individual-sovereignty' money, a 'fiat' currency based on......faith alone (in fact a ponzi scheme) .  Whereas the value of sovereign national  fiat- currencies is based on the nation's productive capacity  (of real goods and services). 

Interestingly Bitcoin can serve as an international currency (among those who have faith in it...) thereby by-passing national fiat currencies.

But governments are now in the process of regulating it, and are creating their own regulated digital currencies. 

issuevoter wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 5:32pm:

"the West's demonisation of China" There, right at the git-go, you know the opinions are going to be propaganda. It's got nothing to do with MMT. It is about making the policies of the Chinese police state seem benign. Never mind an autocratic, secretive, extra-judiciary government whose number one purpose is to its own perpetuation. Never mind censorship, copyrights, and dumping. And don't mention the bogus claim that the above named government has some "right" to take Taiwan by force, because it happened to on the mainland.

You didn't listen to the podast.

The main purpose of the podcast (a presentation by Progressive Economics)   was to examine MMT and its reception in the world; the references to China near the end of the podcast  were merely a consequence  of Steve Grumbine asking whether MMT is acknowledged in China (turns out the debate is raging there, as in the West).

The podcast had nothing to do with "opinions" about MMT but about the facts of MMT.

As for the reference to China:  your ideological rant objecting to  a reference to  the West's containment  of China being propaganda, is itself propaganda because of course the US containment of China is real; Biden has left no doubt: " China will not surpass the US on my watch", and he is throwing every anti-competitive tool at China that he can.

It's gonna get ugly.

Perhaps the OP's podcast - with its reference to China -was too wide ranging as a first post about about MMT, it caught my attention because I am interested to know if and how MMT is received in China. 

[One might think MMT would  find more fertile ground in China, because MMT envisions a degree of direct government involvement in money creation, rather than  money creation via a wholly private sector-led economy]. 

Lisa Jones wrote on Mar 7^th, 2022 at 8:52pm:

Please look up the googled links provided by Notsogreat. They actually support my post.

Care to explain how?


Quote:

Says who? You? A notorious multi troll who only knows how to Google? Pffft! Next!

You still haven't outlined Palley's argument.
So far you all you have given us (as "professional" opinion) is:

"Palley says MMT is simplistic -  case closed". 

That's not debate, dear Lisa.

For anyone in Tassie who wants to learn more about MMT:

https://www.facebook.com/events/4873066192776250

APR 2 AT 9 AM – APR 3 AT 5 PM UTC+10:30

Rethinking Capitalism | Hobart Weekend Intensive
University of Tasmania - Sandy Bay campus

Why do people fear the sovereign currency issuer creating and spending its own money, alongside money creation in private banks (or the central bank acting on behalf of the private banks)?

1. Might reduce the value of their own savings?

- not true, provided the money is spent only on what is available for sale.

2. Might inhibit the ability of the super rich to consume as they might desire, because the poor would have higher living standards under MMT and would therefore command a larger share of the nation's output?

- who cares, we don't need rich fools flogging joy rides in space. 

Certainly the Left with their blind rejection of MMT are shooting themselves in the foot. eg  Albo today (having learnt that you can't win elections by promising to increase taxes) saying he "wont start a revolution, just a renewal".

Meaningless twaddle.

Because as soon as he promises some extra spending, the Right says, "how are you going to pay for it?"   



 

Mad as Hell's take on MMT...

https://www.facebook.com/801729290/videos/1206132393125925/

Sad evidence of Australia's declining per capita GDP,  which began after the GFC,  amid widening inequality:

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=AU

The graph shows Oz per capita GDP peaked in 2013.

Actually the only countries I have found with continually rising per capita GDP since the GFC are the US and China; Japan has flat-lined since it's property bubble burst in 1990, and most other countries have flat-lined or gone backwards since the GFC.

The government can no longer afford to decently maintain (and increase) the  social housing stock, or fund  age-care packages, or the NDIS.

The pundits are saying rising Commonwealth debt (and interest payment on debt) will require higher taxes and/or lower spending in the future.

Doesn't stack up.

Of course the currency-issuing government should not be borrowing from (or taxing) private lenders in the first place.

Wonder how long it will take for everyone to wake up?

MMT progress in the US:

(copied from twitter)

Austerity is Murder🌹#MMT🧨
@sdgrumbine
#MMT Founder
@RealProgressUS
 
@RP_In_Action

Host of @Cheesemacro

and The Rogue Scholar http://patreon.com/realprogressivesrealprogressives.org
6,617 Following
8,339 Followers

Jan 31, 2020
Some basics.

The US Dollar is a tax credit.
It is a unit of measure.
You can't run out of inches
You can't run out of numbers
The government can't run out of dollars...
unless it purposely, politically chooses to.

https://statuscoup.com/congress-has-plenty-of-money-to-protect-ukrainians-but-not-americans-from-covid/

President Biden announced Wednesday that the U.S. will provide war-torn Ukraine an additional $800 million in security assistance, spiking the total to $1 billion over the last week.

The money will provide more weapons including Javelin anti-tank and Stinger anti-aircraft missiles. The additional $1 billion comes after Biden just signed a new spending bill into law which provided Ukraine $13.6 billion.

Yet, President Biden announced the administration was running out of money to test, treat, and vaccinate people without health insurance. According to NPR, Congress declined to add to $22.5 billion in funding for additional COVID testing and vaccination, due to pushback from Republicans and some House Democrats who argued that the new COVID spending would take away separate funding that was promised to at least 30 states but hadn’t been spent yet".

From the NYT:

Uncertainty for Biden’s Covid Plan After Aid Is Dropped From Spending Bill
The $15.6 billion emergency aid package was stripped amid disputes over how to pay for it, injecting uncertainty into the president’s pandemic response plan.


Yes...austerity (due to the false narrative of a currency-issuing government having "no money") is literally murder...

One economist's objections to MMT:

For example (this is also another one of my criticisms of MMT), MMT theorists have no idea about how other nations might react to an Australian Government pursuing macroeconomic policy in-line with MMT. Australia is a small, open economy that has a large portion of its economy reliant on international trade and international financial markets (our dollar being on the foreign exchange and our bonds being available for
purchase in international bond markets).

If other nations that were more economically conservative (or even just hedge funds and investment banks that trade our dollar) were to catch wind of Australia’s new macroeconomic policy direction and had concerns about Australia’s dollar devaluing, it might cause a speculative frenzy which could crush our currency and subsequently our economy. It almost ends up being a Game Theory type situation between countries. If one were to pursue these policies, they don’t know if they will be punished or not by other countries and financial markets. The payoff being large but the consequences also being large.

If you think of it from this perspective, it makes sense that policy makers play it safe and don’t pursue MMT macroeconomic policies as they don’t want to risk pushing the nation to the brink from a speculative frenzy on our currency and a refusal to buy our bonds.
It might be the case that governments talk a big game about a ‘balanced budget’ but then pursue MMT in secret. However, this would still be subject to significant risk if other countries were to catch on".

Note the highlighted: better utilization of the nation's resources, including permanent real full-employment, would not "devalue" the currency, but increase its value, because of the nation's higher and more stable output.

Admittedly there are global implications re resource mobilization and poverty eradication , so MMT will ultimately be part of achieving a better world, described here:

"We are individuals, driven by unconscious survival instincts common to all of us.
But to survive on a finite planet, we need to consciously aim for universal sustainable prosperity -which can only be achieved by global governance dedicated to achieving that goal.

Otherwise individuals will always form into groups dedicated to their own self-interest (driven by unconscious survival instincts.

So we need:

1. The criminalization of war via an ICJ backed by a UNSC minus the veto, dedicated to upholding the principles of the UNUDHR. (otherwise someone will always find a reason to go to war eg Putin in Ukraine, and Bush in Iraq.

2. The globalization of MMT, so that elimination of poverty is based on mobilization of resources, not money.

As for being "environmentally responsible" - some are, some aren't, so it's important that those who are, are the same ones in charge of environmental sustainability"



 

Why does government put taxes on things?
To raise money for government to spend.

But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend.


MMT = Magic Money Tree.

Modern Monetary Theory relies upon the theft of peoples savings
from printing money and causing inflation
in order that Govts. can come up with ways of spending money
which they don't have to have taxation to pay for.

It's a Ponzi scheme that will eventually go bust as
money becomes almost worthless.
Look at the Weimar Republic in Germany and Zimbabwe for proof of that.
In both you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:16pm:

Modern Monetary Theory relies upon the theft of peoples savings from printing money and causing inflation in order that Govts. can come up with ways of spending money which they don't have to have taxation to pay for. It's a Ponzi scheme that will eventually go bust as money becomes almost worthless. Look at the Weimar Republic in Germany and Zimbabwe for proof of that. In both you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread.

It's worse how they replace physical precious metals with paper derivatives and trade them to keep the price artificially low. Even worse is the way our super funds refuse  to invest in physical precious metals but will buy shares in precious metals companies along with shares in banks who produce nothing and trade in worthless FIAT currencies. That is who we are forced to invest in, in this country. Little wonder that Russia, China and India etc are going to kick our arse :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:21pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:16pm: Modern Monetary Theory relies upon the theft of peoples savings from printing money and causing inflation in order that Govts. can come up with ways of spending money which they don't have to have taxation to pay for. It's a Ponzi scheme that will eventually go bust as money becomes almost worthless. Look at the Weimar Republic in Germany and Zimbabwe for proof of that. In both you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread. It's worse how they replace physical precious metals with paper derivatives and trade them to keep the price artificially low. Even worse is the way our super funds refuse  to invest in physical precious metals but will buy shares in precious metals companies along with shares in banks who produce nothing and trade in worthless FIAT currencies. That is who we are forced to invest in, in this country :(

That's right Nail,
I asked Aussie Super about 20 years ago -
if they could put all my Super into physical gold and they
had no option to do that and none foreseeable in the future.
They insisted that it was either in the bank or on shares.
It has cost me a lot of money from their bad policies.

I'm convinced they didn't like it because they
couldn't see a way of getting annual fees from me.
They wanted their slice of the action so
it wasn't about my financial future but their own greed.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:25pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:21pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:16pm: Modern Monetary Theory relies upon the theft of peoples savings from printing money and causing inflation in order that Govts. can come up with ways of spending money which they don't have to have taxation to pay for. It's a Ponzi scheme that will eventually go bust as money becomes almost worthless. Look at the Weimar Republic in Germany and Zimbabwe for proof of that. In both you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread. It's worse how they replace physical precious metals with paper derivatives and trade them to keep the price artificially low. Even worse is the way our super funds refuse  to invest in physical precious metals but will buy shares in precious metals companies along with shares in banks who produce nothing and trade in worthless FIAT currencies. That is who we are forced to invest in, in this country :( That's right Nail, I asked Aussie Super about 20 years ago - if they could put all my Super into physical gold and they had no option to do that and none foreseeable in the future. They insisted that it was either in the bank or on shares. It has cost me a lot of money from their bad policies. I'm convinced they didn't like it because they couldn't see a way of getting annual fees from me. They wanted their slice of the action so it wasn't about my financial future but their own greed.

No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different. Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :(

---

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:32pm:

No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different. Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :(

Thanks Nail,
your chart shows it well.
Aussie Super cost us all a lot of money with their halfwit advice.
A monkey could have made better decisions.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:36pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:32pm: No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different. Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :( Thanks Nail, your chart shows it well. Aussie Super cost us all a lot of money with their halfwit advice. A monkey could have made better decisions.

Instead they take money from small business contributions to super and force small business to indirectly support huge business who contribute nothing to these small businesses. What a scam :(

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:41pm:

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:36pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:32pm: No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different. Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :( Thanks Nail, your chart shows it well. Aussie Super cost us all a lot of money with their halfwit advice. A monkey could have made better decisions. Instead they take money from small business contributions to super and force small business to indirectly support huge business who contribute nothing to these small businesses. What a scam :(

Hi Nail,
it shows you what happens when other people
get their hands on your money.
They lose it and give plenty to themselves.
It's legal theft.

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:43pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:41pm: Bobby. wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:36pm: Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 3:32pm: No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different. Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :( Thanks Nail, your chart shows it well. Aussie Super cost us all a lot of money with their halfwit advice. A monkey could have made better decisions. Instead they take money from small business contributions to super and force small business to indirectly support huge business who contribute nothing to these small businesses. What a scam :( Hi Nail, it shows you what happens when other people get their hands on your money. They lose it and give plenty to themselves. It's legal theft.

yes they forcibly take money from small aussie businesses and hand it over to the likes of harvey norman and jbhifi by buying shares in their companies who just buy container loads of junk from china :(

TGD believes that the government can print food to provide a wage guarantee, food, housing, and a bunch of other stuff, without causing inflation. And a lot of other things the CCP wants him to believe.

He has latched onto MMT in a desperate effort to give credibility to his crazy ideas.

Frank wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 2:06pm:

Why does government put taxes on things? To raise money for government to spend.

That's the current system foisted onto an unknowing electorate, by greedy private financiers.

Fact: currency-issuing governments don't NEED to tax or borrow in order to spend; the constraint for such governments is available resources, not money.

[url]http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/   [/url]


Quote:

But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend.

Addressed above, the limit for government is resources, not money.   


Quote:

MMT = Magic Money Tree.

Indeed money is always created out of thin air - it's magic!

....whether created by banksters, or central banks creating "borrowed" money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v14iP_qnlgU

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 1:12pm:

Frank wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 2:06pm: Why does government put taxes on things? To raise money for government to spend. That's the current system foisted onto an unknowing electorate, by greedy private financiers. Fact: currency-issuing governments don't NEED to tax or borrow in order to spend; the constraint for such governments is available resources, not money. http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/ Quote: But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend. Addressed above, the limit for government is resources, not money.    [quote] MMT = Magic Money Tree.

Indeed money is always created out of thin air - it's magic!

....whether created by banksters, or central banks creating "borrowed" money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v14iP_qnlgU

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 1:13pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:12pm: Frank wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 2:06pm: Why does government put taxes on things? To raise money for government to spend. That's the current system foisted onto an unknowing electorate, by greedy private financiers. Fact: currency-issuing governments don't NEED to tax or borrow in order to spend; the constraint for such governments is available resources, not money. http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/ Quote: But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend. Addressed above, the limit for government is resources, not money.    [quote] MMT = Magic Money Tree. Indeed money is always created out of thin air - it's magic! ....whether created by banksters, or central banks creating "borrowed" money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v14iP_qnlgU

Complete  and utter BS.
When you barter you give something in exchange. Money replaces that something by giving it an agreed VALUE. Nothing has no value so money MUST have value, it cannot be thin air.
Don't be an idiot.

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:21pm:

Even worse is the way our super funds refuse  to invest in physical precious metals but will buy shares in precious metals companies along with shares in banks who produce nothing and trade in worthless FIAT currencies.

Fiat currencies - unlike Bitcoin - are not worthless because they are backed by the  nation's productivity.

The gold standard was abandoned because nations could not hold sufficient gold to enable orderly international trade.


Quote:

That is who we are forced to invest in, in this country. Little wonder that Russia, China and India etc are going to kick our arse :(

Investment is tricky at any time, you can't blame the fiat currency system for that.   

Frank wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 1:21pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:12pm: Frank wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 2:06pm: Why does government put taxes on things? To raise money for government to spend. That's the current system foisted onto an unknowing electorate, by greedy private financiers. Fact: currency-issuing governments don't NEED to tax or borrow in order to spend; the constraint for such governments is available resources, not money. http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/ Quote: But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend. Addressed above, the limit for government is resources, not money.    [quote] MMT = Magic Money Tree. Indeed money is always created out of thin air - it's magic! ....whether created by banksters, or central banks creating "borrowed" money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v14iP_qnlgU Complete  and utter BS.

You didn't read and learn from Mosler's explanation of how fiat currencies work.


Quote:

When you barter you give something in exchange.

But the barter system disappeared centuries ago -  except perhaps when nations lack sufficient foreign exchange...


Quote:

Money replaces that something by giving it an agreed VALUE.

"Value" determined in competitive free markets, which often produces results incompatible with 'social' values  eg below-poverty wages, unemployment) , leading to what we call 'market failure'. Whereas the 'value' of education and good health is priceless. 


Quote:

Nothing has no value so money MUST have value, it cannot be thin air.

The question is: HOW is money created?

Answer: out of thin air.

You walk into a bank seeking a loan. If you are "credit worthy",  the bank creates - out of thin air - a deposit in your account (irrespective of the bank's customers' deposits).   


Quote:

Don't be an idiot.

It remains to be seen whether I'm an idiot for attempting to educate you.

Sir lastnail wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:32pm:

No they see Gold and Silver as a direct competitor to their worthless FIAT currency so they make the lame excuse that physical metals are not a growth vehicle but we know different.

How is gold a growth vehicle, other than by price inflation?


Quote:

Little wonder China, Russia and India are going to kick our arses with their gold back currencies :(

Those nations' currencies are not backed by gold, they are fiat currencies.

But this  article shows how old systems - like yours -  die hard:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/what-countries-are-on-the-gold-standard-today

"Switzerland is one of the top countries with the largest gold reserves, and it was also the last country to eliminate its connection to the Gold Standard. In 1999, the country voted to sever ties between the country’s currency and gold, meaning the Swiss franc need not be backed by gold. However, in 2014, the country seemed poised to return to the Gold Standard under the “Save our Swiss Gold” motion.

This initiative was put to the vote, and it stipulated that the Swiss National Bank’s assets should include at least 20% gold, and the SNB should be banned from selling gold or storing its gold reserves abroad. This initiative ended up being rejected.

"Therefore, while Switzerland might be mentioned on the list of what countries are on the gold standard today, it no longer uses this system".

Bobby. wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 3:36pm:

Thanks Nail, your chart shows it well. Aussie Super cost us all a lot of money with their halfwit advice. A monkey could have made better decisions.

Indeed, but see my replies to Nail.

Btw, Weimar and  Zimbabwe are examples of nations subject to production losses - respectively, confiscation of Ruhr valley machinery by France after WW1, and loss of food production when unskilled black farmers took over farms confiscated from skilled white farmers. And Venezuela, loss of access to the sole source of foreign  currency when the oil market collapsed, a couple of years into Chavez's rule. 

IOW, inflation is always a supply constraint problem; ie, provided the currency-issuing government only purchases what is available for sale in its own currency (to which it has unlimited  access), then there will be no excess  money chasing too few goods.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 1:34pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:21pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:13pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 1:12pm: Frank wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 2:06pm: Why does government put taxes on things? To raise money for government to spend. That's the current system foisted onto an unknowing electorate, by greedy private financiers. Fact: currency-issuing governments don't NEED to tax or borrow in order to spend; the constraint for such governments is available resources, not money. http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/ Quote: But why bother raising money through taxation when government can just print and spend whaever money it wants? Print some more and give it to people to spend. Addressed above, the limit for government is resources, not money.    [quote] MMT = Magic Money Tree. Indeed money is always created out of thin air - it's magic! ....whether created by banksters, or central banks creating "borrowed" money. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v14iP_qnlgU Complete  and utter BS. You didn't read and learn from Mosler's explanation of how fiat currencies work. [quote]When you barter you give something in exchange.

But the barter system disappeared centuries ago -  except perhaps when nations lack sufficient foreign exchange...


Quote:

Money replaces that something by giving it an agreed VALUE.

"Value" determined in competitive free markets, which often produces results incompatible with 'social' values  eg below-poverty wages, unemployment) , leading to what we call 'market failure'. Whereas the 'value' of education and good health is priceless. 


Quote:

Nothing has no value so money MUST have value, it cannot be thin air.

The question is: HOW is money created?

Answer: out of thin air.

You walk into a bank seeking a loan. If you are "credit worthy",  the bank creates - out of thin air - a deposit in your account (irrespective of the bank's customers' deposits).   


Quote:

Don't be an idiot.

It remains to be seen whether I'm an idiot for attempting to educate you.
[/quote]

Idiotic rubbish.
Otherwise 100 Swiss Frank's is the same as 100 Zimbabwean dollars - an obvious idiocy.

Frank wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 3:01pm:

Idiotic rubbish.

You still haven't read Mosler.


Quote:

Otherwise 100 Swiss Frank's is the same as 100 Zimbabwean dollars - an obvious idiocy.

No it's not; the value of 100 Swiss Francs compared to Zimbabwe's currency - in foreign exchange - is determined by the productivity of the Swiss nation compared to that of Zimbabwe.

Whereas the value of the Swiss Franc to the Swiss people is what it can purchase within Switzerland.

Give yourself a break, and read Stephanie Kelton's 'The Deficit Myth'.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 3:16pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 3:01pm: Idiotic rubbish. You still haven't read Mosler. Quote: Otherwise 100 Swiss Frank's is the same as 100 Zimbabwean dollars - an obvious idiocy. No it's not; the value of 100 Swiss Francs compared to Zimbabwe's currency - in foreign exchange - is determined by the productivity of the Swiss nation compared to that of Zimbabwe. Whereas the value of the Swiss Franc to the Swiss people is what it can purchase within Switzerland. Give yourself a break, and read Stephanie Kelton's 'The Deficit Myth'.

So there is more than thin air behind money, it's not just the printing of it that matters, cockwomble.
It IS a symbol, a medium,  of something actual, like all symbols and mediums. Money, like language, symbols etc REFERS to something, stand is for something - not for thin air and nothing.

Don't be so stupid. It's bad enough to be a CCP stooge. Don't be a moronic CCP stooge.

Frank wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2022 at 6:34pm:

So there is more than thin air behind money, it's not just the printing of it that matters, cockwomble.

Correct; both the creation - which is always out of nothing - and spending of money, which is constrained by availability of resources (including goods, services, labor etc)  are important.



Quote:

It IS a symbol

...of a nation's currency


Quote:

a medium,  of something actual, like all symbols and mediums.

....yes, like the 'points' which keep score in a sports competition. Where do these 'points' come from, as they are added to the score board in the course of the game? Can the game run out of them? 


Quote:

Money, like language, symbols etc REFERS to something, stand is for something - not for thin air and nothing.

Though money is indeed created 'ex nihilo', after the act of its creation, it is indeed something.

Now consider the birth of a new nation. Its treasury and reserve bank, plus the private banks,  will have to issue its currency 'ex nihilo' in ever increasing amounts, as the nation grows. 


Quote:

Don't be so stupid. It's bad enough to be a CCP stooge. Don't be a moronic CCP stooge.

Can you identify my error, in the above outline of how money is created?

freediver wrote on Mar 31^st, 2022 at 6:10pm:

TGD believes that the government can print food to provide a wage guarantee, food, housing, and a bunch of other stuff, without causing inflation. And a lot of other things the CCP wants him to believe. He has latched onto MMT in a desperate effort to give credibility to his crazy ideas.

Who is TGD?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 3:25pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 6:10pm: TGD believes that the government can print food to provide a wage guarantee, food, housing, and a bunch of other stuff, without causing inflation. And a lot of other things the CCP wants him to believe. He has latched onto MMT in a desperate effort to give credibility to his crazy ideas. Who is TGD?

TransGender Deviots.

Gordon wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 3:27pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 4th, 2022 at 3:25pm: freediver wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 6:10pm: TGD believes that the government can print food to provide a wage guarantee, food, housing, and a bunch of other stuff, without causing inflation. And a lot of other things the CCP wants him to believe. He has latched onto MMT in a desperate effort to give credibility to his crazy ideas. Who is TGD? TransGender Deviots.

I get really annoyed by posters using acronyms expecting
that everyone instantly knows what they mean.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 2:13pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 3rd, 2022 at 6:34pm: So there is more than thin air behind money, it's not just the printing of it that matters, cockwomble. Correct; both the creation - which is always out of nothing - and spending of money, which is constrained by availability of resources (including goods, services, labor etc)  are important. Quote: It IS a symbol ...of a nation's currency [quote]a medium,  of something actual, like all symbols and mediums.

....yes, like the 'points' which keep score in a sports competition. Where do these 'points' come from, as they are added to the score board in the course of the game? Can the game run out of them? 


Quote:

Money, like language, symbols etc REFERS to something, stand is for something - not for thin air and nothing.

Though money is indeed created 'ex nihilo', after the act of its creation, it is indeed something.

Now consider the birth of a new nation. Its treasury and reserve bank, plus the private banks,  will have to issue its currency 'ex nihilo' in ever increasing amounts, as the nation grows. 


Quote:

Don't be so stupid. It's bad enough to be a CCP stooge. Don't be a moronic CCP stooge.

Can you identify my error, in the above outline of how money is created?


[/quote]


You ARE amazingly stupid.
You have to actually kick a goal - produce something - to have a score recorded. A game runs out of scores the moment you do not kick a goal. Only in a mental asylum would they add scores to the board without actual gospals being produced.


Your new nation analogy is also very stupid as no new nation - or anything - is created ex nihilio.

Your MMT  idiocy is simply an economic perpetuum mobile: movement without energy input, magic money from nothing.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 3:25pm:

Who is TGD?

the great divide'

Frank wrote on Apr 5^th, 2022 at 9:14am:

You ARE amazingly stupid.

...so let's see what you didn't  understand about the 'points' analogy.


Quote:

You have to actually kick a goal - produce something - to have a score recorded.

Correct. But the 'point'  - earned by kicking a goal -  or the dollar  - earned by making something -  are both created 'ex nihilo' (in the case of the dollar, or yen, or whatever, in the treasury and central bank - and private banks - of the nation's currency-issuing government). 


Quote:

A game runs out of scores the moment you do not kick a goal.

Wrong. Your error here is to identify/conflate  the score with the points used to measure the score. The points available for scoring are infinite.


Quote:

Only in a mental asylum would they add scores to the board without actual gospals being produced.

Correct.


Quote:

Your new nation analogy is also very stupid as no new nation - or anything - is created ex nihilio.

Also correct (apart from being "stupid"); but you are continuing with your original mistake;  ie the new nation consisting of people and resources is created by decree or conquest, whereas the new nation's currency is created 'ex nihilo'. 


Quote:

Your MMT  idiocy is simply an economic perpetuum mobile: movement without energy input, magic money from nothing.

Refuted above.

In short:

Wealth = resources + labour + know how.

Money is only a convenience** - created 'ex nihilo' - in this wealth creation equation.

**and a method of establishing sovereignty over a nation, requiring  payment of fees and fines in the government's currency.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 5^th, 2022 at 1:50pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 5th, 2022 at 9:14am: Quote: You have to actually kick a goal - produce something - to have a score recorded. Correct. But the 'point'  - earned by kicking a goal -  or the dollar  - earned by making something -  are both created 'ex nihilo' (in the case of the dollar, or yen, or whatever, in the treasury and central bank - and private banks - of the nation's currency-issuing government).  [quote]A game runs out of scores the moment you do not kick a goal. Wrong. Your error here is to identify/conflate  the score with the points used to measure the score. The points available for scoring are infinite. [quote]Only in a mental asylum would they add scores to the board without actual gospals being produced.

Correct.


[/quote]


You are contradicting yourself - the score is not a measure of the goals except it is.  You cannot add infinite number of points to the board if no goals are kicked. The score is the "money" that symbolises the number of times the ball was kicked in the goal in accordance to the rules of the games. You cant go down to the pitch at night by yourself and and just add scores to the board.


Stupid is correct.  Should the Chinese and the Russians ever think like you the world would be safe from them.

Frank wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 10:10am:

You are contradicting yourself - the score is not a measure of the goals except it is.

An obvious absurdity.

Repeat after me: the score of team A is MEASURED/TALLIED  by 'points', which are drawn from the ether (created 'ex nihilo'). Same for team B. The goals are real, the points used to tally the goals (ie the score) are created 'ex nihilo'.

Obviously a higher scoring game requires more points to be added to the score board, to measure/tally the higher number of goals. 
There is no limit to the points available for scoring, the limit to the number of points (numbers) actually used in the game depends on the number of goals achieved by each team.


Quote:

You cannot add infinite number of points to the board if no goals are kicked.

Correct! In fact you can't add ANY points to the board if no goals are kicked!.


Quote:

The score is the "money" that symbolises the number of times the ball was kicked in the goal in accordance to the rules of the games.

Incorrect. 

The score, measured in points to record the goals (output/product)  in a sports competition, is analogous to the economic output (eg GDP) measured in money to record the 'value' of that output/product.

In short, 'points' measure goals, 'money' measures economic output; both the points and the money are created 'ex nihlio'. 


Quote:

You cant go down to the pitch at night by yourself and and just add scores to the board.

You can indeed measure the number of goals you scored by yourself, from a given  number of kicks,  tallied/compared over several nights.....


Quote:

Stupid is correct.  Should the Chinese and the Russians ever think like you the world would be safe from them.

Just remember the readers of these posts are judging the quality of your argument.

Quote:

The score, measured in points to record the goals (output/product)  in a sports competition, is analogous to the economic output (eg GDP) measured in money to record the 'value' of that output/product. In short, 'points' measure goals, 'money' measures economic output; both the points and the money are created 'ex nihlio'.

You are hopelessly confused. Points measure goals, money measures economic output. Neither is ex nihilio. You cannot print measures of economic output with zero reference to the actual output - which is the MMT wheeze you are agitating for is about.

You imagine that you can print limitless money, give it to people - and so they can easily buy limited economic outputs and resources. Stupidly, you want to decouple the actual economic output from its measure, money. And to top up the stupidity, you insist that this would not devalue the measure (ie cause inflation), as in Zimbabwe, Weimar etc.


Your logic should not oppose even counterfeit money. Why make printing money a government monopoly if it has no link to what it measures, actual economic output!  And why not? Let's each of us just print all the money we need and bingo! all problems are solved!   Genius magic!

Frank wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 1:34pm:

You are hopelessly confused. Points measure goals,

 

Correct....1 goal, 2 goals,3 goals,.....where are those numbers coming from, to tally the goals kicked? 


Quote:

money measures economic output.

Correct (let's see if you can make it three times in a row...)...1 dollar, 2 dollars, 3 dollars, to tally, eg, the 'value' of hours worked. Where did those dollars come from?


Quote:

Neither is ex nihilio.

Bummer...failed at the third step....


Quote:

You cannot print measures of economic output with zero reference to the actual output

Correct again (it's a pity you stumbled at the 3rd step)


Quote:

- which is the MMT wheeze you are agitating for is about.

No, MMT points out REAL resources (inc.  labour and know-how), not money,  are WHAT CONCERNS US in the search for sustainable prosperity.


Quote:

You imagine that you can print limitless money,  give it to people

No of course not; however the currency-issuing  government CAN purchase whatever is available  for sale in the nations' currency, without taxing or borrowing from the private sector....spot the difference?


Quote:

- and so they can easily buy limited economic outputs and resources.

Correct again**, the currency-issuing government doesn't have to tax or borrow, as outlined above (**...what a pity about the stumble at the 3rd step!....)


Quote:

Stupidly, you want to decouple the actual economic output from its measure, money.

No I want to measure the economic output WITH money - for convenience**...money which is  created 'ex nihilo'.

** note: the ancient Britons managed an iron-age  economy quite well without money, before the Romans turned up. 


Quote:

And to top up the stupidity, you insist that this would not devalue the measure (ie cause inflation), as in Zimbabwe, Weimar etc.

No, (hyper-) inflation is always a supply constraint problem (eg loss of Ruhr valley machinery confiscated by the French after WW1, and loss of food production after confiscation of white farms, to black farmers who didn't know how to farm).


Quote:

Your logic should not oppose even counterfeit money.

Creation of money by the state and its agencies is not 'counterfeiting".   


Quote:

Why make printing money a government monopoly

Creating money is always a legal monopoly of someone, in our system a privilege confined to private financiers.


Quote:

if it has no link to what it measures, actual economic output!

Already answered above; the government cannot buy what is not available for purchase.

OTOH, government ought to be able to purchase whatever the electorate deems is desirable, within the nation's real resource constraint (not some mythical 'debt and deficit' constraint. 


Quote:

And why not? Let's each of us just print all the money we need and bingo! all problems are solved!   Genius magic!

Unfortunately, you will find yourself wearing an orange prison jumpsuit if you try that....

You are militantly, vigorously stupid. Poor countries are poor because their governments are just not printing enough banknotes.

Frank wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 2:56pm:

You are militantly, vigorously stupid.

You have given up debating, again. Pity.   


Quote:

Poor countries are poor because their governments are just not printing enough banknotes.

No, poor countries are poor because they lack the resources to house, clothe, and feed everyone...or because the First World is stealing their resources for peanuts.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 4^th, 2022 at 3:25pm:

freediver wrote on Mar 31st, 2022 at 6:10pm: TGD believes that the government can print food to provide a wage guarantee, food, housing, and a bunch of other stuff, without causing inflation. And a lot of other things the CCP wants him to believe. He has latched onto MMT in a desperate effort to give credibility to his crazy ideas. Who is TGD?

I worked it out -
it means the poster called  - thegreatdivide


I believe that money printing is dangerous.
It risks causing hyper-inflation
and destroying peoples savings.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 3:34pm:

I believe that money printing is dangerous.

Yes it can be, if the resources on which to spend the money are not available.


Quote:

It risks causing hyper-inflation and destroying peoples savings.

Yes, that is a risk, if the the "money printing" doesn't take account of the resource constraint.

But next time you hear the mainstream banging on about 'taxpayer money' , you should know the mainstream  have been deluded into thinking the government cannot create its own money.

Fact is the potential for inflation - ie, demand exceeding supply -  is present, whether  money is created in the private or public sector, and whether it is spent in the public or private sector (as at present). 

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 3:03pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 2:56pm: You are militantly, vigorously stupid. You have given up debating, again. Pity.    Quote: Poor countries are poor because their governments are just not printing enough banknotes. No, poor countries are poor because they lack the resources to house, clothe, and feed everyone...or because the First World is stealing their resources for peanuts.

I have given up on you, again.
You are self-contradictory, saying both that money is simply there for the printing and that it is a measure of actual economic output.

If my hourly work is worth $100 dollars, printing two $100 bills and giving me both for the same one hour work doesn't make me suddenly earn double. The output of my one hour is the same but now the value of one unit of money I get for it is halved because twice as much currency is in circulation even though there is no corresponding doubled economic output.

Either money IS a measure of economic goods and services PRODUCED or it is just printed at will 'ex nihilio', without reference to what is actually produced (your idiotic idea).

It's futile to debate a self-contradictory fool. You have the luxury or self- indulgence to talk paradoxical crap, I am not here to indulge you, only to point out your stupidity and your lack of even rudimentary grasp of what you are parroting.

The Economist:
“Speaking with MMT’s adherents is sometimes like watching a football match with friends who insist the ball remains stationary while every other element in the game, including the pitch and goalposts, moves around it.”

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 3:50pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 3:34pm: I believe that money printing is dangerous. Yes it can be, if the resources on which to spend the money are not available. Quote: It risks causing hyper-inflation and destroying peoples savings. Yes, that is a risk, if the the "money printing" doesn't take account of the resource constraint. But next time you hear the mainstream banging on about 'taxpayer money' , you should know the mainstream  have been deluded into thinking the government cannot create its own money. Fact is the potential for inflation - ie, demand exceeding supply -  is present, whether  money is created in the private or public sector, and whether it is spent in the public or private sector (as at present).

I remember back in the mid 1990s -
our accountant at work was discussing our Super
and how necessary it was.
He said that future liabilities for providing pensions
and other social security were unfunded so Super
was needed and we should even salary sacrifice into it.

What he didn't explain was that the only way out was to print money.
Yes - pensions and social security are actually paid for
by money printing.
Even paying for all the gigantic army of public servants is unfunded.
We are stuck in a money printing rut forever.
It will never be paid off -
that's a dream from politicians to gullible voters.


Meantime - savings are destroyed and prices keep on going up.
Houses and shares went up over 20% in the last year or two.

What is money?
At root, the problems with MMT lie with its (mis)understanding of what money is, and what role money plays under capitalism.

MMTers subscribe to a theory of money known as ‘chartalism’. This term was coined (no pun intended) by a German economist called Georg Friedrich Knapp, who put forward a hypothesis called ‘the state theory of money’.

In short, Knapp asserted that money originates with the state and its imposition of taxes upon a people. The state, according to chartalists, creates money - and then creates a demand for this particular currency by insisting on its use as a ‘means of payment’.

To truly understand the nature of money, however, we must turn to another 19th century German economist: Karl Marx.

In Capital, Marx noted that “the riddle presented by money is but the riddle presented by commodities”. In other words, to understand the role of money in society, we must first understand its real origins - those of commodity production and exchange.

Marx explained that money’s history is tied to the rise of the commodity: goods and services produced not for individual consumption, but for exchange. All commodities, Marx showed, have an exchange value. This is a relationship - a ratio - between commodities, expressing how much of one product would (on average) be exchanged for another.

Building on the ideas of his predecessors, such as David Ricardo, Marx outlined how the value of a commodity is dependent on the labour embodied within it. This labour consists both of the ‘dead labour’ contained within the raw materials, tools, etc. required for its production, and the ‘living labour’ labour added in the production process by the worker.

Marx called this total labour the ‘socially necessary labour time’: the time required for the production of a given commodity, based on the current level of technology and industry, etc. within society.

With this in mind, Marx explained in his Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy how money serves several functions:

As a unit of account, or measure of value. In money terms, this is represented by prices.
As a medium of exchange. In this role, money breaks up the circulation of commodities into two separate acts: an act of sale (C-M, a commodity exchanged for money); and an act of purchase (M-C, money exchanged for a different commodity).
As a store of value, allowing accumulated wealth to be maintained and preserved over time.
And as a means of payment, allowing debts (denominated in a certain currency) to be settled and taxes to be paid.
Money, therefore, plays a number of roles. Above all though, money is a representation of value: the ultimate expression of the generalisation of the law of value; the logical conclusion of the development of commodity production and exchange, which requires a universal yardstick – a standard measure – against which the value of all other commodities can be expressed.

And yet chartalism (and also MMT) offers no analysis of value, or of commodity production and exchange. As a result, it misses the essence of capitalism, and of money’s role within it.

Money arises historically, not by design, but as a result of the development of commodity production and exchange. It begins primarily as a ‘money commodity’, such as the precious metals, with a value of its own, but later develops to be a mere symbol of value. This is clear today, where money is predominantly not coins, but cash and credit; notes and numbers.
https://www.socialist.net/marxism-vs-modern-monetary-theory.htm

Frank wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 3:51pm:

I have given up on you, again. You are self-contradictory, saying both that money is simply there for the printing and that it is a measure of actual economic output.

To be exact, I'm saying money is (always) created 'ex nihilo', which is different to saying that "money is simply there for the printing". 

Money of course can only "be there" AFTER it has been created 'ex nihilo" .  It's that simple.


Quote:

If my hourly work is worth $100 dollars, printing two $100 bills and giving me both for the same one hour work doesn't make me suddenly earn double.

That's correct, but you still are confusing the utility, or 'value' of money, with its method of creation (ex nihilo). 


Quote:

The output of my one hour is the same but now one unit of money I get for it is halved because twice as much currency is in circulation even though there is no corresponding doubled economic output.

1. You are not the government; you must earn money, the government does not need to 'earn' money (in MMT).

2. You can only receive the specified pay for an hour's work; whereas the government  can buy whatever is available for purchase,  without borrowing or taxing (or "working"). 


Quote:

Either money IS a measure of economic goods and services PRODUCED or it is just printed at will 'ex nihilio', without reference to what is actually produced (your idiotic idea).

Money can never be "created at will" (even though it is created'ex nihilo') by the government (or anyone else); I think you need to understand that production occurs in both the private and public sectors and that production in the public sector can be self-funded by government; whereas private sector players must earn (or borrow) money from employers (or private financiers) respectively.  Hence the difference between "taxpayer money" and "government money",  which is the MMT insight. 



Quote:

It's futile to debate a self-contradictory fool. You have the luxury or self- indulgence to talk paradoxical crap, I am not here to indulge you, only to point out your stupidity and your lack of even rudimentary grasp of what you are parroting.

Does the paragraph in blue explain it to you?

Quote:

1. You are not the government; you must earn money, the government does not need to 'earn' money (in MMT). 2. You can only receive the specified pay for an hour's work; whereas the government  can buy whatever is available for purchase,  without borrowing or taxing (or "working").

But due to inflation it's the same as stealing money
from people with savings.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 4:14pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 3:51pm: I have given up on you, again. You are self-contradictory, saying both that money is simply there for the printing and that it is a measure of actual economic output. To be exact, I'm saying money is (always) created 'ex nihilo', which is different to saying that "money is simply there for the printing".  Money of course can only "be there" AFTER it has been created 'ex nihilo" .  It's that simple. Quote: If my hourly work is worth $100 dollars, printing two $100 bills and giving me both for the same one hour work doesn't make me suddenly earn double. That's correct, but you still are confusing the utility, or 'value' of money, with its method of creation (ex nihilo).  [quote]The output of my one hour is the same but now one unit of money I get for it is halved because twice as much currency is in circulation even though there is no corresponding doubled economic output.

1. You are not the government; you must earn money, the government does not need to 'earn' money (in MMT).

2. You can only receive the specified pay for an hour's work; whereas the government  can buy whatever is available for purchase,  without borrowing or taxing (or "working"). 


Quote:

Either money IS a measure of economic goods and services PRODUCED or it is just printed at will 'ex nihilio', without reference to what is actually produced (your idiotic idea).

Money can never be "created at will" (even though it is created'ex nihilo') by the government (or anyone else); I think you need to understand that production occurs in both the private and public sectors and that production in the public sector can be self-funded by government; whereas private sector players must earn (or borrow) money from employers (or private financiers) respectively.  Hence the difference between "taxpayer money" and "government money",  which is the MMT insight. 



Quote:

It's futile to debate a self-contradictory fool. You have the luxury or self- indulgence to talk paradoxical crap, I am not here to indulge you, only to point out your stupidity and your lack of even rudimentary grasp of what you are parroting.

Does the paragraph in blue explain it to you?
[/quote]
You are weird.
When you look at your bank balance, there are no printed bank notes and minted coins there.

What IS there is a numerical expression of the VALUE of your economic reserves. THAT value is not ex nihilio.

You have a weird, blinkered fetish about bank notes.

You completely misunderstand private and public production. You also completely misunderstand simple concepts like 'earn'. The government doesn't 'earn' because it does no productive work. For you to treat making laws as if that was just like making furniture is revealingly stupid.

All your utterances reveal a hopeless conceptual chaos and misunderstanding.

Frank wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 6:05pm:

You are weird. When you look at your bank balance, there are no printed bank notes and minted coins there.

 

Correct, indeed many countries are already entering the era of the 'cashless society', involving merely the changing of digits in bank accounts on computers. 

MMT teaches the currency-issuing government, through its agencies (treasury and central bank)  can change those digits as desired;  limited by what is available for sale/purchase. 


Quote:

What IS there is a numerical expression of the VALUE of your economic reserves. THAT value is not ex nihilio.

Which is what I intended to teach you with the points analogy, but failed miserably, obviously.

The 'value'  measured in money - and hence ability to purchase real resources -  is real, and cannot be created ex nihilo, but must be created by labour and production.  But the measure itself, ie, the unit of currency, is created ex nihilo.

Note: when the government had to lock down the non-essential economy in March 2020, it immediately began injecting $billions into the bank accounts of laid-off workers, ie $billions created ex nihilo, though we were told the government borrowed the money.....it didn't, it just booked $200 billion dollars debt, later much reduced as the virus turned out to be a squid (unfortunately: a decent virus would have forced the non-essential economy to  remain closed likely until more than several $trillions of  'debt' had been accumulated, forever unrepayable. 


Quote:

You have a weird, blinkered fetish about bank notes.

No, though I thought you understood that the term "printing money" meant issuing digital currency/money. 


Quote:

You completely misunderstand private and public production.

No I don't; education is public production, in fact the basis of all private production. Likewise public infrastructure, the basis of efficient private production.   


Quote:

You also completely misunderstand simple concepts like 'earn'. The government doesn't 'earn' because it does no productive work.

The government doesn't earn, but public sector production (education, infrastructure) is the foundation of private sector production.


Quote:

For you to treat making laws as if that was just like making furniture is revealingly stupid.

The transfer of knowledge from teacher to student, and building the public infrastructure (roads, ports) is  the absolute necessity for making and distributing furniture. 


Quote:

All your utterances reveal a hopeless conceptual chaos and misunderstanding.

(......)

Bobby. wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 5:26pm:

Quote: 1. You are not the government; you must earn money, the government does not need to 'earn' money (in MMT). 2. You can only receive the specified pay for an hour's work; whereas the government  can buy whatever is available for purchase,  without borrowing or taxing (or "working").  But due to inflation it's the same as stealing money from people with savings.

But a well-managed, fully productive  economy will limit the available money to available resources, hence no inflation.

The question is who gets to create the required quantity of money (to maintain real full employment without creating inflation) - private financiers charging interest on loans, or the currency-issuing government issuing 'debt free' money' (as opposed to  "taxpayers' money").... 

Fascinating article:

https://ellenbrown.com/2022/04/05/the-coming-global-financial-revolution-russia-is-following-the-american-playbook/

Russia is discovering (or is on the verge of discovering) that it does not need U.S. dollars as backing for the ruble’s exchange rate. Its central bank can create the rubles needed to pay domestic wages and finance capital formation. The U.S. confiscations thus may finally lead Russia to end neoliberal monetary philosophy, as Sergei Glaziev has long been advocating in favor of MMT [Modern Monetary Theory]. …

What foreign countries have not done for themselves – replacing the IMF, World Bank and other arms of U.S. diplomacy – American politicians are forcing them to do. Instead of European, Near Eastern and Global South countries breaking away out of their own calculation of their long-term economic interests, America is driving them away, as it has done with Russia and China.

A video on Fiat currency:

https://www.brighteon.com/e755ff4b-6b4b-4f0c-b82e-e17e23f001ca

Bobby. wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 11:37pm:

A video on Fiat currency: https://www.brighteon.com/e755ff4b-6b4b-4f0c-b82e-e17e23f001ca

It’s the same old problem:
they can't pay: old age pension, social security and public servants without printing money.
Our economy is fake – it’s based on unfunded liabilities.
No Govt. has a solution and it’s never spoken of in election campaigns.
When will their Ponzi scheme collapse?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 12:00am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 11:37pm: A video on Fiat currency: https://www.brighteon.com/e755ff4b-6b4b-4f0c-b82e-e17e23f001ca It’s the same old problem: they can't pay: old age pension, social security and public servants without printing money.

Could government pay for all those things if taxes were sufficiently high?

But in any case you - like everyone -  recoil against the idea (unless it's someone else's taxes...)


Quote:

Our economy is fake – it’s based on unfunded liabilities.

Not entirely fake, the economy produces many desirable things.

As to "unfunded", that gets us back to taxation, as noted above. 

But MMT teaches us government can create its own money  ("government money"), as opposed to "taxpayer money", the quantum of "government money" being constrained by the nation's resources and productivity, to avoid inflation. 


Quote:

No Govt. has a solution and it’s never spoken of in election campaigns.

Interestingly the Greens are now MMT-literate, though they don't advertise the fact, given the current level of ignorance re what is money and how it works (eg, most people still think government budgets are like their own household budgets).

And another   MMT-literate party is standing in the May election: TNL.

Should be an interesting election, with  cost of living, and housing/rent  going through the roof, and  poor wages growth resulting in people abandoning the 2 major parties. Albo can't explain how he intends to fund raising age-care workers wages.etc, apart from some vague measures re "cutting waste". 



Quote:

When will their Ponzi scheme collapse?

Fiat currencies (unlike Bitcoin) are not a ponzi scheme, because they are backed by the nation's productivity.

Your fiat currency video is nonsense based on the  obsolete gold standard era.

Speaking of which:

https://ellenbrown.com/2022/04/05/the-coming-global-financial-revolution-russia-is-following-the-american-playbook/

" The Rise and Fall of the PetroDollar

First, some history: The U.S. dollar was adopted as the global reserve currency at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944, when the dollar was still backed by gold on global markets. The agreement was that gold and the dollar would be accepted interchangeably as global reserves, the dollars to be redeemable in gold on demand at $35 an ounce. Exchange rates of other currencies were fixed against the dollar.

But that deal was broken after President Lyndon Johnson’s “guns and butter” policy exhausted the U.S. kitty by funding war in Vietnam along with his “Great Society” social programs at home. French President Charles de Gaulle, suspecting the U.S. was running out of money, cashed in a major portion of France’s dollars for gold and threatened to cash in the rest; and other countries followed suit or threatened to.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon ended the convertibility of the dollar to gold internationally (known as “closing the gold window”), in order to avoid draining U.S. gold reserves".


...hence the enforced demise of the gold standard.....

Your video attacking fiat currencies is mostly ignorance re the creation and function of money, with the usual old nonsense about Weimar and  Zimbabwe, which are examples of a collapse in resources supply, leading to excess demand.

Quote:

Your video attacking fiat currencies is mostly ignorance re the creation and function of money, with the usual old nonsense about Weimar and  Zimbabwe, which are examples of a collapse in resources supply, leading to excess demand.

That video shows the uncomfortable truth -
that all Fiat currencies were abused by Govts.
and either became worthless or will become worthless.

Weimar and Zimbabwe were the worst examples.
How long have the $US  and $A got?


https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/103/543/732/original/286e77b4e17cf7e7.jpg

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 1:03pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7th, 2022 at 12:00am: Bobby. wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 11:37pm: A video on Fiat currency: https://www.brighteon.com/e755ff4b-6b4b-4f0c-b82e-e17e23f001ca It’s the same old problem: they can't pay: old age pension, social security and public servants without printing money. Could government pay for all those things if taxes were sufficiently high? But in any case you - like everyone -  recoil against the idea (unless it's someone else's taxes...)

I wish I had an answer.

Repeating what I posted:

I remember back in the mid 1990s -
our accountant at work was discussing our Super
and how necessary it was.
He said that future liabilities for providing pensions
and other social security were unfunded so Super
was needed and we should even salary sacrifice into it.

What he didn't explain was that the only way out was to print money.
Yes - pensions and social security are actually paid for
by money printing.
Even paying for all the gigantic army of public servants is unfunded.
We are stuck in a money printing rut forever.
It will never be paid off -
that's a dream from politicians to gullible voters.


Meantime - savings are destroyed and prices keep on going up.
Houses and shares went up over 20% in the last year or two.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 1:03pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7th, 2022 at 12:00am: Our economy is fake – it’s based on unfunded liabilities. Not entirely fake, the economy produces many desirable things. As to "unfunded", that gets us back to taxation, as noted above.  But MMT teaches us government can create its own money  ("government money"), as opposed to "taxpayer money", the quantum of "government money" being constrained by the nation's resources and productivity, to avoid inflation.

The fact is that without printing money -
the Govt. could not pay for:
pensions,
social security
and the giant army of public servants.

e.g.
When those old people were younger - making money in jobs
and paying taxes -
the Govts. just spent all that money and the payment
of pensions was put on the "never never".
Not one penny was set aside to pay for their pensions.
Then Keating came along and started
compulsory super to try and make up for it.
It didn't work - they can only be paid by printing money.
We followed a failed economic model for the last 60 years or more.
It's the elephant in the room -
it's such a bad problem that it won't be dealt with in this election by any party
and it is hidden in our main stream media news.


Meantime - our money is already subject to enormous inflation -
houses prices and shares went up 20% in the last few years or less.
Food, petrol and other prices are skyrocketing.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 1:26pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 7th, 2022 at 1:03pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 7th, 2022 at 12:00am: Bobby. wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 11:37pm: A video on Fiat currency: https://www.brighteon.com/e755ff4b-6b4b-4f0c-b82e-e17e23f001ca It’s the same old problem: they can't pay: old age pension, social security and public servants without printing money. Could government pay for all those things if taxes were sufficiently high? But in any case you - like everyone -  recoil against the idea (unless it's someone else's taxes...) I wish I had an answer.

I gave detailed  answers  (inc. explanation of fiat, gold etc)   which you have chosen to ignore (....."you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink'...)


Quote:

Repeating what I posted: I remember back in the mid 1990s - our accountant at work was discussing our Super and how necessary it was.

Your accountant is a micro economist who has no understanding of macro economics.


Quote:

He said that future liabilities for providing pensions and other social security were unfunded so Superwas needed and we should even salary sacrifice into it.

Like I said, no understanding; future government liabilities can always be funded if the nation's productivity and resources base remain intact, over time.


Quote:

What he didn't explain was that the only way out was to print money.

No, his explanation was that self-funding is the answer, for those  who can afford to salary sacrifice into Super.


Quote:

Yes - pensions and social security are actually paid for by money printing. Even paying for all the gigantic army of public servants is unfunded. We are stuck in a money printing rut forever. It will never be paid off - that's a dream from politicians to gullible voters.

What's wrong with "printing money"? I've already explained that there is no problem so  long as the nation's resources/productivity constraints are observed.


Quote:

Meantime - savings are destroyed and prices keep on going up.

All courtesy of neoliberism; MMT could  eliminate price rises, via rationing and price controls when required, and maintain interest rates at zero, while maintaining full employment.   

Just to let you know there are alternatives.... 


Quote:

Houses and shares went up over 20% in the last year or two.

Yes, asset appreciation courtesy of greed-based neoliberalism, with its fake financialized  capitalism. 

Clive Palmer is discussing this very issue on ABC 24 right now
at the National Press Club.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 2:07pm:

The fact is that without printing money - the Govt. could not pay for: pensions, social security and the giant army of public servants.

Well of course the government does  borrow money, by purchasing bonds, so the term "printing money" is misleading. Private banks also "print money" when/if they write you a loan for, say, $500K.


Quote:

e.g.When those old people were younger - making money in jobs and paying taxes - the Govts. just spent all that money and the payment of pensions was put on the "never never". Not one penny was set aside to pay for their pensions. Then Keating came along and started compulsory super to try and make up for it. It didn't work - they can only be paid by printing money. We followed a failed economic model for the last 60 years or more. It's the elephant in the room - it's such a bad problem that it won't be dealt with in this election by any party and it is hidden in our main stream media news. Meantime - our money is already subject to enormous inflation - houses prices and shares went up 20% in the last few years or less. Food, petrol and other prices are skyrocketing.

All already addressed in my previous posts to you.

Btw, how does Clive propose to deal with the $trillion debt, and keep mortgage interest rates low? (I missed his speech). 

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 3:24pm:

All already addressed in my previous posts to you. Btw, how does Clive propose to deal with the $trillion debt, and keep mortgage interest rates low? (I missed his speech).

He reckons house prices are set to crash badly.
Interest rates will have to skyrocket and people won't be able to pay the massive debts.
He wants home loan rates set by Govt to a maximum of 3% to help to stop the crash.



More money printing is tied into the budget for the next 10 years.
Frydenberg indirectly admitted it -  deficit budgets for 10 years to come

https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/clive-palmer-says-he-would-preference-greens-over-coalition-and-labor-party-as-he-hits-out-at-abc-campaign-coverage/news-story/94d1fa1228e31ed2d28da8cda1c746d7


Clive Palmer,

“What matters is not how much money you spend, it’s what your solutions are. I’ve put forward solutions that are novel and are new.”

Mr Palmer attacked the government for rising debt brought upon by programs such as JobKeeper which have successfully insulated the Australian economy from extended recession and growing unemployment.

Instead he suggested Australia enforce a 15 per cent licence on iron ore exports which he claimed could dissolve all national debt in 20 years.

He also proposed that the housing loan rate be frozen at three per cent for the next five years to prevent a catastrophic national mortgage default crisis.

GreatDivide, you have done a wonderful job in responding to people about Modern Money.

Finally I can write the post I first intended

As Rob Parenteau writes: Hyperinflation requires extreme conditions

Senexx wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 6:36pm:

GreatDivide, you have done a wonderful job in responding to people about Modern Money. Finally I can write the post I first intended As Rob Parenteau writes: Hyperinflation requires extreme conditions

What is wrong with MMT is that once the Govts. start printing money they can't stop.
There is always another urgent reason to print more.

First it was the GFC, then Covid and now it's the war in Ukraine and
the military expenditure to supposedly fight China - a superpower.
Of course there were always unfunded liabilities that the Govt. couldn't pay:
old age pensions, social security, armies of public servants, health, schools and roads expenditure
brought on by uncontrolled mass immigration
putting pressure on our services.

We invited millions of people here but they all
needed schools and hospitals etc. -
more unfunded liabilities.
It's like saying there's a party for 1,000 people at my place tomorrow
and having no money for the booze.
So - out comes the credit card.
The hangover is paying it off -
which they can't do.

Money as Debt I - Revised Edition 2009 (Full Movie)


200,685 views
Oct 28, 2015



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nBPN-MKefA

In Australia we print money day and night.

In Zimbabwe they kept printing money
until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread -
so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes.



https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/103/689/342/original/0185558217960b9b.jpg

There is still money for the boys:

Six former prime ministers slugged taxpayers $360,000 in just three months, expenses watchdog reveals.

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/tyyil0/six_former_prime_ministers_slugged_taxpayers/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share



_blue_heat_
Op ·
45 min. ago

Not content with just getting their snout’s in the trough,
they have to get all four trotters in as well.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 8^th, 2022 at 7:04pm:

In Australia we print money day and night.

Which is not a problem, because the Australian government is the legal issuer of the Australian dollar, unlike households and firms (and state governments) who are users of the currency.


Quote:

In Zimbabwe they kept printing money until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread - so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes.

.

Hyperinflation? Have you read the article posted by Senexx?

I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

If you had read it, you would not still be citing Zimbabwe, in reference to the "money printing" practiced by the Australian government, where hyperinflation has never been a problem, and indeed the central bank has been trying to lift inflation for a decade (to 2-3%). 

Bobby. wrote on Apr 7^th, 2022 at 7:18pm:

Senexx wrote on Apr 7th, 2022 at 6:36pm: GreatDivide, you have done a wonderful job in responding to people about Modern Money. Finally I can write the post I first intended As Rob Parenteau writes: Hyperinflation requires extreme conditions What is wrong with MMT is that once the Govts. start printing money they can't stop. There is always another urgent reason to print more.

The main problem today is the government is forced to tax, or borrow from private financiers, therefore running up debt to pay for much needed social programs.


Quote:

First it was the GFC, then Covid

...and in each case, if the government had not intervened,  conditions would have deteriorated so sharply, so as to make the Great Depression look like a picnic in the park.  In fact the GD was prolonged because governments mistakenly cut back on public spending.


Quote:

and now it's the war in Ukraine and the military expenditure to supposedly fight China - a superpower.

Expensive arms races (and actual wars)  are a reflection of human irrationality, manifested in the UNSC veto (yes that veto, all in the news currently, for obvious reasons). 



Quote:

Of course there were always unfunded liabilities that the Govt. couldn't pay: old age pensions, social security, armies of public servants, health, schools and roads expenditure brought on by uncontrolled mass immigration putting pressure on our services.

Yes, but listen carefully: currency-issuing governments could be authorized to fund themselves, the constraint for a currency-issuing government being available resources and the nation's productivity, NOT money.


Quote:

We invited millions of people here but they all needed schools and hospitals etc. - more unfunded liabilities. It's like saying there's a party for 1,000 people at my place tomorrow and having no money for the booze. So - out comes the credit card. The hangover is paying it off - which they can't do.

The question is: does Australia have sufficient RESOURCES to supply all those things?

If the answer is yes, then the nation can have all those things.  Finding the money is not a problem for a currency-issuer, obviously.

You are making the mistake of thinking that the currency-issuing government must necessarily be in the same position as you....the big difference is you have to earn or borrow it; the currency-issuer doesn't.

So that get's us back to real constraint for the government - which is inflation, which for the government is a resource constraint, not a money constraint.

As a matter of fact, the government could write off its debt if it wanted to; the government can not run out of money, it can only run out of resources. 

   

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8^th, 2022 at 9:26pm:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 8th, 2022 at 7:04pm: In Australia we print money day and night. Which is not a problem, because the Australian government is the legal issuer of the Australian dollar, unlike households and firms (and state governments) who are users of the currency. Quote: In Zimbabwe they kept printing money until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread - so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes. . Hyperinflation? Have you read the article posted by Senexx? I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. If you had read it, you would not still be citing Zimbabwe, in reference to the "money printing" practiced by the Australian government, where hyperinflation has never been a problem, and indeed the central bank has been trying to lift inflation for a decade (to 2-3%).

Inflation is way above 3%.

House prices went up 20% in the last year and so did shares.
Inflation is a monster that will eat up our savings -
that includes anyone who will rely upon their Super.

Stephanie Kelton refutes mainstream economists who say the current covid-induced inflation  has debunked MMT:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/verdict-is-in-on-modern-monetary-theory-strategist-says-194714165.html

Even so, a growing number of economists support MMT and view the recent historical record as proof of its success.

In answering the question ‘has MMT failed?’, “The answer is an unequivocal no,” according to Stephanie Kelton, professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University and one of the leading experts on modern monetary theory.

“MMT offers a descriptive framework—a lens—through which to evaluate fiscal and monetary policy,” she wrote on her website back in January. The specific policies taken by certain administrations were made under a framework which does not regard deficits with the same importance as was commonplace even a few years ago.

“The point is, you can’t blame “MMT” for stoking inflation any more than you can blame an optometrist if her patient runs off the road while driving without wearing their prescription lenses,” she wrote. “MMT doesn’t tell us that the world is an open road, free of hazards or the need for caution. It doesn’t reject fiscal responsibility, it redefines it so that our eyes stay focused on the real limits on spending.”

And the real limits are resources, not money, debt or deficits.

In Australia we print money day and night.

In Zimbabwe they kept printing money
until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread -
so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes.



https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/103/689/342/original/0185558217960b9b.jpg

Group known as "Patriotic Millionaires" calls for higher taxes on the wealthy, to avoid a social calamity as inequality soars in the US. 

https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/uknews/tax-the-rich-these-one-percenters-want-people-like-them-to-pay-higher-taxes/ar-AAVZwls?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=e347145f6e59498a84553b68b4339e6f


"While her money opens the doors of power, Disney finds her message also discombobulates ordinary Americans. She is regularly assailed on Twitter for daring to suggest rich people should pay more taxes. The problem is that people have been convinced that “every single person in this country is a billionaire waiting to happen”, in an orchestrated campaign she believes was engineered to protect the wealth of the 1%.

"“Four years ago if you’d said ‘billionaires tax’ then they would have said you can’t bash billionaires, you’re encouraging class warfare. I haven’t heard a whiff of that,” said Disney. “Let’s not kid ourselves, the other side has tested that and found it isn’t working. That class war rhetoric isn’t working any more. And that’s good news. Because if we don’t ruffle some feathers now, we are going to have a class war. A real one.”

Note the underlined, above. That's why MMT will eventually enable  currency-issuing governments to fund themselves without relying on the rich, since currency-issuing governments are constrained by resources, not money. 


"money doesn't grow on rich people" ....Kelton's joke referring to the MMT critics who insist money doesn't grow on (Magic Money Tree) trees (merely proving these  critics don't know anything about how money is created).   

Not to mention  Bezos grew rich on the backs of his workers (only recently unionized). 

Bobby. wrote on Apr 8^th, 2022 at 11:56pm:

In Australia we print money day and night. In Zimbabwe they kept printing money until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread - so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes. https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/103/689/342/original/0185558217960b9b.jpg

Have you turned into a bot? I have already addressed hyper-inflation.

I suggest you try genuine debate, or be exposed as a fraud.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 8^th, 2022 at 10:59pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8th, 2022 at 9:26pm: Bobby. wrote on Apr 8th, 2022 at 7:04pm: In Australia we print money day and night. Which is not a problem, because the Australian government is the legal issuer of the Australian dollar, unlike households and firms (and state governments) who are users of the currency. Quote: In Zimbabwe they kept printing money until you needed a wheelbarrow of money to buy a loaf of bread - so they starting printing 100 trillion dollar notes. . Hyperinflation? Have you read the article posted by Senexx? I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. If you had read it, you would not still be citing Zimbabwe, in reference to the "money printing" practiced by the Australian government, where hyperinflation has never been a problem, and indeed the central bank has been trying to lift inflation for a decade (to 2-3%).  Inflation is way above 3%.

Due to covid-related supply blockages; and poor allocation of covid support - some of which went to millionaires and people who did not need the government support.

See post#93.


Quote:

House prices went up 20% in the last year and so did shares.

House price inflation  resulted from  low interest rates.


Quote:

Inflation is a monster that will eat up our savings - that includes anyone who will rely upon their Super.

Inflation can be managed if its causes are properly addressed.....not by jacking up interest rates which will cause a recession, as Clive Palmer has noted.

(And Clive's  idea to pay down governement debt by taxing iron ore sales may have merit, though its likely to meet the same resistance  as the ALP's resource rent tax proposal a decade ago).   

Quote:

Due to covid-related supply blockages; and poor allocation of covid support - some of which went to millionaires and people who did not need the government support.

The Govt. printed over $300 billion for their Covid policy.



Quote:

House price inflation  resulted from  low interest rates.

The printed money ended up causing inflation.



Quote:

Inflation can be managed if its causes are properly addressed.....not by jacking up interest rates which will cause a recession, as Clive Palmer has noted.

The cause of inflation is to do with the Govt. printing money
and the banks creating money out of thin air from debt.
Did you watch this video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nBPN-MKefA

You will understand that inflation is an indirect way
of making a tax that people with savings pay
by having those savings devalued due to inflation.

You will also see that the whole system is based on
permanent growth of economies in an exponential way
when in fact we live in a finite world of resources.
It's based on a lie.

Booby is on another troll adventure.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 8:19am:

Bobby is on another troll adventure.

Yeah right - shoot the messenger.    ::)

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8^th, 2022 at 9:26pm:

I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

And Hungary 1946.

With its one quintillion pengo note (1 milliard b.-pengo - one million billion pengo).

The largest banknote ever printed.

https://www.currencybanknotes.com/images/smallhungary-replica-1milliard-bpengo.jpg

MeisterEckhart wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 9:22am:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8th, 2022 at 9:26pm: I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. And Hungary 1946. With its one quintillion pengo note (1 milliard b.-pengo - one million billion pengo). The largest banknote ever printed. https://www.currencybanknotes.com/images/smallhungary-replica-1milliard-bpengo.jpg

Nice example -
see here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_peng%C5%91


the currency survived for only 20 years and
experienced the most serious case of hyperinflation ever recorded.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 9:30am:

MeisterEckhart wrote on Apr 9th, 2022 at 9:22am: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8th, 2022 at 9:26pm: I haven't read it yet because I know what causes hyper inflation, the famous examples being Weimar Republic, Zimbabwe and Venezuela. And Hungary 1946. With its one quintillion pengo note (1 milliard b.-pengo - one million billion pengo). The largest banknote ever printed. https://www.currencybanknotes.com/images/smallhungary-replica-1milliard-bpengo.jpg Nice example - see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_peng%C5%91 the currency survived for only 20 years and experienced the most serious case of hyperinflation ever recorded.

My brother bought a dozen of these notes some years ago when they were cheap. They sell for about $AUD600 now (if you can get people to part with them)!

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 1:27am:

Quote: Due to covid-related supply blockages; and poor allocation of covid support - some of which went to millionaires and people who did not need the government support. The Govt. printed over $300 billion for their Covid policy.

Correct; and then cut it in half when covid turned out to be less deadly than expected.

But you still are ignoring the fact that currency-issuing government faces a resource constraint, not a money constraint, and that inflation can be controlled in many ways other than by lifting interest rates. 


Quote:

The printed money ended up causing inflation.

No it didn't; non-government borrowers enticed by low interest rates pushed up housing prices; and pent-up demand fueled by government support in excess of locked down workers' needs (ability ot pay bills during the lock-down) ended up causing inflation. 


Quote:

The cause of inflation is to do with the Govt. printing money and the banks creating money out of thin air from debt.

1. Government "printing money" only causes inflation if there are insufficient resources, in this case, national output on which the government can spend the money.

[This is the reason for all hyperinflation episodes; eg in Zimbabwe the government printed money in an attempt to enable consumers to pay for  more expensive food , - higher food prices  which resulted from expulsion of skilled white farmers in Zimbabwe].

2.  Banks creating money out of thin air from debt; this is how banks ALWAYS create money, when they write loans for (hopefully) credit-worthy customers, independently of the banks' money reserves.


Quote:

Did you watch this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nBPN-MKefA

Watching it now....

1. The speaker has just confirmed my point 2, above. ie banks don't lend money from reserves, but create money out of thin air.

2. Now talking about gold....no doubt heading to the gold standard, which became obsolete  in the 20th century,  when other nations began to fear the  US did not have enough gold to pay its overseas debts (as a result of the costs of the Vietnam war); Nixon took the US off the gold standard in 1971).

3. "How much money exists? In the past it had to be related to gold" .. his thesis is rapidly becoming boring, because the gold standard is now of necessity obsolete, since nations don't have enough gold to enable smooth functioning of international trade and exchange.

4. "The only real limit to (debt) money creation is the creation of debt".

Garbage. The limit to the creation of money is available resources, not debt. 

The currency-issuing government (unlike private- sector players) doesn't NEED to take on debt.

5. "Banks can create as much money as we can borrow" .....correct;  and same as for government spending, if the economy is producing sufficient output on which the money can be spent, there is no inflation problem. 

6. "The artificial world of money..."...a key MMT insight; the hammer is real, the IOU to purchase the hammer is not a "real" resource.

7. "how can it be that the people who produce all the real wealth in the world (workers) be in debt to private banks(t)ers?": ....good question.

8. "if there is no debt there would be no money, because money is debt"...unless the government is authorized to create debt-free money, which is the MMT insight.

9. "Why are interest rates so low"?......  obviously to avoid bankrupting the indebted private (and public) sectors....

10.  "charging of interest is both immoral and impractical" ...correct; I'm looking forward to his conclusions...

11.  "monetary reform - a change of the system - will not come easily, owing to self-interested banksters  etc " ...no kidding, every MMTer knows that's true..

12.  Note all those assassinated presidents who dared to say  the government can create debt free money., then we have that very odd quote from Rockefeller...

My conclusion: the presenter confirms the need for a system change, as taught by MMT, but fails to offer an alternative to debt based money, not based on gold.

Did you see an alternative?


Quote:

You will understand that inflation is an indirect wayof making a tax that people with savings pay by having those savings devalued due to inflation.

Inflation results from excess demand on resources, which is the problem to be solved, while ensuring everyone has access to food, housing and employment. 

And as for your savings,  most people don't get a chance to accumulate savings, your self-interest is as transparent as the banksters the video rails against.   


Quote:

You will also see that the whole system is based on permanent growth of economies in an exponential way when in fact we live in a finite world of resources. It's based on a lie.

Indeed! And MMT offers the solution, since MMT can avoid inflation.

Your solution to the current unsustainable public and private  indebtedness,  enforced by the current crop of banksters?

Too many things to unpack for now.


Quote:

Indeed! And MMT offers the solution, since MMT can avoid inflation. Your solution to the current unsustainable public and private  indebtedness,  enforced by the current crop of banksters?

Stop printing money.
Govts should not be allowed to have deficit budgets by law!
The Libbos new budget calls for deficits for the next 10 years!
Even that's a dream - it will be for the next 100 years
if our economy lasts that long.

We must live within our means.

Deficit budgets are the norm and so they should—it increases the size of the economy.

A Budget regularly in surplus is continually taking money out of the economy.

The Great Depression and WWII debt were paid off with no Budget surplus being achieved.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 4:38pm:

Deficit budgets are the norm and so they should—it increases the size of the economy. A Budget regularly in surplus is continually taking money out of the economy. The Great Depression and WWII debt were paid off with no Budget surplus being achieved.

What would you know Monk?
Tell that to people in Zimbabwe:

https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/103/689/342/original/0185558217960b9b.jpg

What caused hyperinflation in Zimbabwe, the Weimar Republic etc?

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 10:22pm:

What caused hyperinflation in Zimbabwe, the Weimar Republic etc?

Can't you read?

Money printing.        ::) ::) ::)

No, not money printing. As I said, budgets aim to be in deficit not surplus.

Alan Kohler's take on options for government, given that economic flat-earthers (rejecting MMT)  are still  in control of the treasury and reserve bank: 

https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2022/04/07/tax-more-happiness-alan-kohler/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Morning%20News%20-%2020220407

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 10:35pm:

Alan Kohler's take on options for government, given that economic flat-earthers (rejecting MMT)  are still  in control of the treasury and reserve bank:  https://thenewdaily.com.au/finance/finance-news/2022/04/07/tax-more-happiness-alan-kohler/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Morning%20News%20-%2020220407

So the answer is more tax?

How about living within our means?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 2:45pm:

Too many things to unpack for now.

Yeh......


Quote:

Stop printing money.

But as your video proved, if banks stop issuing 'debt money' ,  money eventually runs out because interest on the debt has to be repaid (in our current evil system, as explained in YOUR video). 


Quote:

Govts should not be allowed to have deficit budgets by law!

In MMT, currency-issuing governments do not NEED to deficit spend; the constraint for such governments is resources, not money.


Quote:

The Libbos new budget calls for deficits for the next 10 years!

Owing to the present evil debt-money system, which forces  both government and private sector players  to pay interest on debt money (did YOU watch your video....?); but the currency-issuing government should NOT be forced to do this, so long as resources are available to (for example) train and provide  teachers, age and disability care workers, and builders to build the required stock of public housing.

See Alan Kohler's article (post #111) on the funding task  facing governments both Left and Right, in the coming years.


Quote:

Even that's a dream - it will be for the next 100 years if our economy lasts that long.

Given advancing productivity associated with developing AI and IT, our economies will last if available resources are well-managed.
Your debt and deficit hang up is obsolete flat-earth economics. 


Quote:

We must live within our means.

.

Read Kohler's article (post #111); he's got bad news for you, unless you are prepared to pay much higher taxes in the coming decades. 

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 10:46pm:

So the answer is more tax?

Yes, as explained by Alan Kohler (without a MMT-literate government , as noted by Kohler)


Quote:

How about living within our means?

Er, elderly people are already lying in their own faeces in understaffed nursing homes ( as per the royal commission into aged care) ....be careful how you define "living within  our means" - you might be in a nursing home one day.....

Hi TGD,

Quote:

our economies will last if available resources are well-managed.

You seem to be hung up on resources.
The richest continent on earth is Africa.
You name it and they have it:
gold, diamonds, oil, coal, minerals including rare earth minerals.
including sugar, salt, iron, cobalt, uranium, copper,
bauxite, silver, petroleum, and cocoa beans, but also tropical timber and tropical fruit......
Super rich soil and abundant rainfall for producing
enormous quantities of food.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_Africa

Those resources have led Africans to be the
poorest group of nations on earth.
It's full of 3rd world starving people.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 4:38pm:

Deficit budgets are the norm and so they should—it increases the size of the economy. A Budget regularly in surplus is continually taking money out of the economy. The Great Depression and WWII debt were paid off with no Budget surplus being achieved.

Correct; have you studied MMT?

In fact (simply put),  the government's deficit is the private sector's surplus.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 11:45pm:

You seem to be hung up on resources.

That's because proper resource mobilization  is the key to our prosperity, not artificial money which is made out of nothing, as YOUR video patiently explained, and which has gone right over your head. 



Quote:

The richest continent on earth is Africa. You name it and they have it: gold, diamonds, oil, coal, minerals including rare earth minerals.

Correct, all controlled and exploited  by colonial capital which  charges interest on everything that moves - as patiently explained in YOUR video, so that the profits of resource development go to global capital, not to African workers.


Quote:

including sugar, salt, iron, cobalt, uranium, copper, bauxite, silver, petroleum, and cocoa beans, but also tropical timber and tropical fruit...... Super rich soil and abundant rainfall for producing enormous quantities of food. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_Africa

Yes, all exploited by evil private financiers who worked out how to create never ending debt money requiring ever increasing interest payments; that's why most African countries are (or end up) in the clutches of the IMF (Instant Misery Fund) run by the evil financiers exposed in YOUR video. 


Quote:

Those resources have led Africans to be the poorest group of nations on earth. It's full of 3rd world starving people.

And now you know why; and indeed, why Oz itself -which has all the resources needed to house, clothe and feed (and employ) all 26 million citizens (the pop. of a large chinese city) - is scarred by public homelessness, in all its major cities.   

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 12:05am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 9th, 2022 at 11:45pm: You seem to be hung up on resources. That's because proper resource mobilization  is the key to our prosperity, not artificial money which is made out of nothing, as YOUR video patiently explained, and which has gone right over your head.  Quote: The richest continent on earth is Africa. You name it and they have it: gold, diamonds, oil, coal, minerals including rare earth minerals. Correct, all controlled and exploited  by colonial capital which  charges interest on everything that moves - as patiently explained in YOUR video, so that the profits of resource development go to global capital, not to African workers. [quote]including sugar, salt, iron, cobalt, uranium, copper, bauxite, silver, petroleum, and cocoa beans, but also tropical timber and tropical fruit...... Super rich soil and abundant rainfall for producing enormous quantities of food. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_Africa

Yes, all exploited by evil private financiers who worked out how to create never ending debt money requiring ever increasing interest payments; that's why most African countries are (or end up) in the clutches of the IMF (Instant Misery Fund) run by the evil financiers exposed in YOUR video. 


Quote:

Those resources have led Africans to be the poorest group of nations on earth. It's full of 3rd world starving people.

And now you know why; and indeed, why Oz itself -which has all the resources needed to house, clothe and feed (and employ) all 26 million citizens (the pop. of a large chinese city) - is scarred by public homelessness, in all its major cities.   
[/quote]


Maybe the bankers need to be put on trial?

Note: when Mugabe kicked all the Whites out of
Rhodesia and called it Zimbabwe it went down the toilet?
So getting rid of all those White bankers didn't work.

Bobby. wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 12:10am:

Maybe the bankers need to be put on trial?

No, the debt-money system itself needs to be changed, as patiently explained in your video.


Quote:

Note: when Mugabe kicked all the Whites out of Rhodesia and called it Zimbabwe it went down the toilet?

Mugabe kicked all the white farmers (not bankers)  off their farms (which occupied land stolen  by white colonialists  in the 19th century)....and Zimbabwe "went down the toilet" because the black tenants who were allocated the confiscated farms had no idea how to farm....


Quote:

So getting rid of all those White bankers didn't work.

Nothing to do with the white bankers who were not 'got rid of', - though they like all bankers  are part of an evil debt-money system ravaging the whole world, as explained at length  in your video. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 9^th, 2022 at 11:49pm:

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 9th, 2022 at 4:38pm: Deficit budgets are the norm and so they should—it increases the size of the economy. A Budget regularly in surplus is continually taking money out of the economy. The Great Depression and WWII debt were paid off with no Budget surplus being achieved. Correct; have you studied MMT? In fact (simply put),  the government's deficit is the private sector's surplus.

Only a little bit. I did do a year of introductory economics as part of a business course I started but did not finish.

As I said, the Great Depression/WWII debt was paid off without a single surplus Budget.

Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 6:56am:

As I said, the Great Depression/WWII debt was paid off without a single surplus Budget.

Yes, it's interesting that Menzies, the 'Liberal' (conservative)  hero,  ran government  deficits in his last 9 years in office.

https://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/menzies-a-failure-by-todays-rules-ran-a-budget-to-build-the-nation

"Between 1958-59 and 1966-67 (when he retired), Menzies averaged budget deficits of 1.8% of GDP. His biggest deficit of 3.3% of GDP in his final year in office was larger than the last Swan deficit, which the Abbott government has called a “disaster” and a “budget crisis.

So, what was Menzies up to? He clearly wasn’t obsessed with the budget deficits or worried about numbers of public servants that so concern Hockey. The economy grew quite steadily, often growing at more than 6% in real terms. Unemployment was mostly around 2% or less, and only 1.6% when he retired. Over his time in power, you couldn’t even argue that Menzies was trying to balance the budget over the business cycle.

Menzies was interested in nation-building. He not only wanted rapid population growth, but he wanted infrastructure growth and growth in the health and education services that make a society both cohesive and productive".

Those were the days of the post WW2 era when Keynesian spending was the norm, before the disastrous NAIRU neoliberal era was established, owing to erroneous handling of the global oil price spikes in the 70's. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 1:01am:

Bobby. wrote on Apr 10th, 2022 at 12:10am: Maybe the bankers need to be put on trial? No, the debt-money system itself needs to be changed, as patiently explained in your video. Quote: Note: when Mugabe kicked all the Whites out of Rhodesia and called it Zimbabwe it went down the toilet? Mugabe kicked all the white farmers (not bankers)  off their farms (which occupied land stolen  by white colonialists  in the 19th century)....and Zimbabwe "went down the toilet" because the black tenants who were allocated the confiscated farms had no idea how to farm.... [quote]So getting rid of all those White bankers didn't work.

Nothing to do with the white bankers who were not 'got rid of', - though they like all bankers  are part of an evil debt-money system ravaging the whole world, as explained at length  in your video. 
[/quote]


My point is that resources doesn't necessarily lead to prosperity.
Do you think we should have been a far more prosperous society
given our huge resources with only 26 million people to spend it on?
Wouldn't you expect us to have surplus budgets
and to not be printing money to devalue our currency
and rob the savings of our people through inflation?

Bobby. wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 1:43pm:

My point is that resources doesn't necessarily lead to prosperity.

And your point is wrong: it's ONLY proper management of resources which can lead to prosperity.


Quote:

Do you think we should have been a far more prosperous society given our huge resources with only 26 million people to spend it on?

I certainly think Australia has all the resources it needs to decently  house, clothe feed and employ everyone of working age.



Quote:

Wouldn't you expect us to have surplus budgets and to not be printing money to devalue our currency and rob the savings of our people through inflation?

You need to understand that surplus government budgets (unlike your own household budget)  are  not necessarily associated with growth in living standards; Howard only achieved a surplus because of favourable terms of trade (mostly high iron-ore prices to China).
Compare that with Menzies who  ran deficit budgets - and housed and employed everyone, unlike Howard (see post #121)

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 6^th, 2022 at 3:03pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 6th, 2022 at 2:56pm: You are militantly, vigorously stupid. You have given up debating, again. Pity.    Quote: Poor countries are poor because their governments are just not printing enough banknotes. No, poor countries are poor because they lack the resources to house, clothe, and feed everyone...or because the First World is stealing their resources for peanuts.

It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda.

Off-Topic replies have been moved to this Topic.

wombatwoody wrote on Apr 10^th, 2022 at 3:37pm:

It's called 'privatisation', the selling off of state assets to stave off bankruptcy caused by the bank-created debt. Third World countries are handing over control of their land and resources to the international bankers because they cannot pay back the vast loans made, on purpose, by the banks to ensnare them in this very situation. The world does not have to be in poverty and conflict, it is manipulated to be that way because it serves the bankster's agenda.

Indeed. Bobby's video , entitled 'Money as Debt'  highlighted that very fact.

https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 12:43pm:

Indeed. Bobby's video , entitled 'Money as Debt'  highlighted that very fact. https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA

Everyone needs to watch that video even though it is
46 minutes long.

https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/103/909/238/original/71199adad2a9a3f6.jpg

Bobby. wrote on Apr 11^th, 2022 at 12:59pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 11th, 2022 at 12:43pm: Indeed. Bobby's video , entitled 'Money as Debt'  highlighted that very fact. https://youtu.be/2nBPN-MKefA Everyone needs to watch that video even though it is 46 minutes long.

Indeed, although  I notice your reply in the 'privatization' thread - which freediver highjacked from this MMT thread because he doesn't want to face up to the disastrous effects, global as well as national,   of our current debt-money system -  is no doubt your belief the problem lays in the fact money is created 'ex nihilo', rather than the fact money is created as debt.

Hence your misplaced, uncomprehending desire for balanced government budgets, rather than the correct solution which is enabling currency issuing governement to issue debt free money, limited only by the resource constraint (to avoid inflation).

Interesting discussion; I can see why you and I took very different readings out of your video on "money as debt".

You still think money has 'value', regardless of whether it is government-issued debt-free money, or private bankster-issued debt money.

I'm trying to teach you only resources have value. while noting money is always and can only ever be created out of nothing, unless you use shells - or gold  (which is impossible because there is insufficient gold for all nations to participate in trade).

Maybe a consideration of the idea that a perfectly  planned economy could be made to function well, without money at all, might change your view?

(eg in theory:  an economy in which government had perfect knowledge of all the nation's  citizens' capabilities, and their actual contributions to economic development, with these different contributions rewarded by defined goods and services allocations....no money required for the economy to function). 

Edit: I now see  your post #128 which you previously posted in freediver's high-jacked "privatization' thread.

Thanks...and notice the implication of  'fake' money, 'fake' because it is created out of nothing, an idea refuted above (and in MMT).   

SadKangaroo wrote-Yesterday at 11:51am

[re privatization, in reply to freediver who asked on Apr 10th, 2022 at 8:28pm:

"How do you know (private owners are only interested in .....ripping out as much money in as short a time as possible")]

SadKangaroo wrote:

Quote:

Privatization transfers the model of the entity away from service to profit. When you do this on an infrastructure level, especially when there are protections for the company when things go wrong and governments willing to bail them out because they simply can't fail, it's even worse. But we're getting way ahead of ourselves. The notion that the Government shouldn't run/own anything is incredibly short-sighted and is ideologically based.  Even likening it to communism only strengthens that argument. I know there are far more important examples of infrastructure, but take Broadband as an example. The private ISPs put money into the most profitable areas and that was it.  Regional let alone Rural Australia was left out.  Even Telstra's billions they wanted to spend pre-NBN, it was only in profitable areas and they wanted exemptions to their minimum service obligations under legislation in return. The private sector was never going to operate services at a loss, even if they can recoup those costs from the inner city customers, it's just not good business.  If a Government has to legislate the servicing of those unprofitable areas, what's the point of privatising? Power, Water, Health etc, it's all the same. There is no doubt there can be bloat when the government-run these entities, but we can learn from overseas how to manage these sorts of issues, like say Singapore. But instead, we get told from one side of politics that the private sector can do it better but time and time again, in terms of service, that's proven to be wrong. We know what they mean by "do it better" is actually making money.  Those services, and the people that use them (again, Power, Water, Health etc) become the commodity under these models. Not only does the business model change from Service to Profit, but that profit comes by commoditising us and when things go wrong, because they're vital services and infrastructure, we have to pay a second time when our taxes are used to fix the problem/bail them out. Gold Coast water was an example.  The local council had to buy back the company because costs were skyrocketing and service levels, repairs, started falling.  Water! It should have never been privatized in the first place, but now we're left with a massive tax bill due to broken contacts that will be paid off for many many years to come. I'm not flat out anti-privatization, there are some use cases for it, but the notion that the private sector do it better and more efficiently and Government shouldn't run/own these entities, as a blanket statement I do not support.

Excellent critique of privatization.

The sad fact of course is that ever since governments were forced to abandon post war Keynesian deficit spending in the 1950's, 60's and 70's, governments have sought ways to balance their budgets, including selling-off public utilities to raise money without increasing taxes.

But that process adopted since the 80's, intended to overcome the so called 'stagflation of the mid 70's (see below)   - aka neoliberalism (ie, the 'supply-side economics' favored by Thatcher and Reagan, designed to fight inflation first, rather than maintain Keynesian full employment)  has left us with governments  increasingly unable to meet the needs of the community, so that today after a series of disasters such as the GFC, the covid pandemic and now a war, governments all around the world are heavily indebted and increasingly unable to address soaring inequality.

Now for the first time in decades we again have inflation above 3% (above most central banks' "comfort level").

But the fact is this current post-pandemic bout of inflation is caused by supply side problems, just as was the case with the oil price shocks in the 70's leading to 'stagflation' - high inflation and high unemployment (the result of the Arab oil embargo related to the Palestine/Israel conflict).

How to solve  the current global national (public and private) indebtedness disaster, with soaring inequality and increasing poverty?

(To be addressed in an upcoming post).

See post #127,  for the full video of the history of money as debt.

To summarize:

The ancient religions frowned on charging interest on money loans ("usury").

In the middle ages, lenders found they could charge interest as a 'risk' premium, thus creating money as debt.

Money lent was backed by gold (usually); but the paper money itself was of course created 'ex nihilo'.

To this day, the privilege of creating money ('ex nihilo') is reserved for private financiers entitled to charge interest on loans.

An anachronism, in the current post gold-standard era in which currency-issuing governments (with their own central bank and treasury) could be authorized to  issue  their own fiat currencies, without taxing, or borrowing from  private sector financiers/banksters.

The limit to government money-creation being the available resources on which government can spend the government-created 'debt-free' money, to avoid inflation.

(Needless to say, inflation is the key topic which  mainstream economists employ to attack MMT, but they are misguided in their attacks. There are many ways to deal with inflation).

Here we have a solution to the current public  'austerity' situation , forced onto "broke" governments who are unable to raise sufficient taxes because of political (not economic) considerations, or to borrow money which must be repaid with interest, despite the fact  currency-issuing governments don't need to borrow at all, nor maintain balanced budgets , as users of the currency (you and I, and private firms etc) must do.

Read Stephanie Kelton's: The Deficit Myth.

or read for free:

http://moslereconomics.com/mandatory-readings/innocent-frauds/

MMT is starting to enter the university faculties, so it behoves us to be aware of the future impact that this new economics will have on the political process.

[quote author=AusbetterWorld link=1645944963/131#131 date=1649736519]


(to expand on the inflation concern noted in #post 131):

The limit to government money-creation being the available resources on which government can spend the government-created 'debt-free' money, to avoid inflation, noting that the real causes of any inflationary episode are based on a resource constraint, whether supply or demand based, or both).

Needless to say, inflation is the key topic which  mainstream economists employ to attack MMT, but they are misguided in their attacks. There are many ways to deal with inflation, once its true source has been identified, something which mainstream economists and central bankers never do, since their 'toolkit' is limited to raising interest rates which runs the risk of causing a recession).

The idea that government deficits are bad is wrong.

https://www.keenforthesenate.com/a-resilient-economy/

"This may seem an outrageous claim to make—surely economists (if not Pauline Hansen) know how money works? However, no less an authority than The Bank of England has said that economic textbooks are wrong about how banks work:

The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks:

Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits.

Mainstream economic textbooks are as wrong about how governments operate as they are about how banks operate.

When a bank makes a loan for, say, $1 million, it puts $1 million in the borrower’s deposit account, and it records that the borrower now owes the bank $1 million. The deposit account is a Liability of the bank; the loan is the bank’s Asset. Similarly, if the government makes a payment–say paying $1 million for goods purchased from a firm–then the government puts $1 million in the deposit account and $1 million in the Reserves of the banking system.

Where does the bank get the money that it lends, and where does the government get the money that it spends? Neither the bank nor the government “get” the money: instead both banks and the government create money.

Money is primarily bank deposit accounts these days (plus a small amount of cash). Deposit accounts are a Liability of the banking sector. To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time.

A bank loan of $1 million does this by increasing the Loans of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million.
Government spending of $1 million does this by increasing the Reserves of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million.

The same thing happens in reverse when a loan is repaid, or the government taxes the private sector: money is destroyed".

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 9:47am:

The idea that government deficits are bad is wrong. https://www.keenforthesenate.com/a-resilient-economy/ "This may seem an outrageous claim to make—surely economists (if not Pauline Hansen) know how money works? However, no less an authority than The Bank of England has said that economic textbooks are wrong about how banks work: The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks: Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits. Mainstream economic textbooks are as wrong about how governments operate as they are about how banks operate. When a bank makes a loan for, say, $1 million, it puts $1 million in the borrower’s deposit account, and it records that the borrower now owes the bank $1 million. The deposit account is a Liability of the bank; the loan is the bank’s Asset. Similarly, if the government makes a payment–say paying $1 million for goods purchased from a firm–then the government puts $1 million in the deposit account and $1 million in the Reserves of the banking system. Where does the bank get the money that it lends, and where does the government get the money that it spends? Neither the bank nor the government “get” the money: instead both banks and the government create money. Money is primarily bank deposit accounts these days (plus a small amount of cash). Deposit accounts are a Liability of the banking sector. To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time. A bank loan of $1 million does this by increasing the Loans of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. Government spending of $1 million does this by increasing the Reserves of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. The same thing happens in reverse when a loan is repaid, or the government taxes the private sector: money is destroyed".

Nonsense. Not even you believe that money is meaningless.

The point of $1 million bank deposit is that you can withdraw it in cash or you can transfer it to someone else's account in exchange for, say, a house that is now yours.  You get REAL stuff when you tap your card at the shops, not just shifting deposits hither and yon.
Money stands in for all that REAL stuff, not for nothing and thin air.i

Frank wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 12:01pm:

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 9:47am: The idea that government deficits are bad is wrong. https://www.keenforthesenate.com/a-resilient-economy/ "This may seem an outrageous claim to make—surely economists (if not Pauline Hansen) know how money works? However, no less an authority than The Bank of England has said that economic textbooks are wrong about how banks work: The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks: Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits. Mainstream economic textbooks are as wrong about how governments operate as they are about how banks operate. When a bank makes a loan for, say, $1 million, it puts $1 million in the borrower’s deposit account, and it records that the borrower now owes the bank $1 million. The deposit account is a Liability of the bank; the loan is the bank’s Asset. Similarly, if the government makes a payment–say paying $1 million for goods purchased from a firm–then the government puts $1 million in the deposit account and $1 million in the Reserves of the banking system. Where does the bank get the money that it lends, and where does the government get the money that it spends? Neither the bank nor the government “get” the money: instead both banks and the government create money. Money is primarily bank deposit accounts these days (plus a small amount of cash). Deposit accounts are a Liability of the banking sector. To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time. A bank loan of $1 million does this by increasing the Loans of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. Government spending of $1 million does this by increasing the Reserves of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. The same thing happens in reverse when a loan is repaid, or the government taxes the private sector: money is destroyed". Nonsense. Not even you believe that money is meaningless.

Not that money is meaningless, just that it is created by the legal currency-creators (whether by government, or private sector banks).

as noted by prof Steve Keen:

"To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time".


Quote:

The point of $1 million bank deposit is that you can withdraw it in cash or you can transfer it to someone else's account in exchange for, say, a house that is now yours.

And the point is the bank can write you the loan which  enables you to withdraw the money irrespective of the bank's money reserves.


Quote:

You get REAL stuff when you tap your card at the shops, not just shifting deposits hither and yon. Money stands in for all that REAL stuff, not for nothing and thin air.

Correct..... Amazing, you are correct sometimes.

But here's the bit you are missing: money "stands in for Real  stuff, but is itself created out of nothing.

(just likes the points  used to keep score in a sporting match).

i

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 12:23pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 12:01pm: thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 9:47am: The idea that government deficits are bad is wrong. https://www.keenforthesenate.com/a-resilient-economy/ "This may seem an outrageous claim to make—surely economists (if not Pauline Hansen) know how money works? However, no less an authority than The Bank of England has said that economic textbooks are wrong about how banks work: The reality of how money is created today differs from the description found in some economics textbooks: Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits. Mainstream economic textbooks are as wrong about how governments operate as they are about how banks operate. When a bank makes a loan for, say, $1 million, it puts $1 million in the borrower’s deposit account, and it records that the borrower now owes the bank $1 million. The deposit account is a Liability of the bank; the loan is the bank’s Asset. Similarly, if the government makes a payment–say paying $1 million for goods purchased from a firm–then the government puts $1 million in the deposit account and $1 million in the Reserves of the banking system. Where does the bank get the money that it lends, and where does the government get the money that it spends? Neither the bank nor the government “get” the money: instead both banks and the government create money. Money is primarily bank deposit accounts these days (plus a small amount of cash). Deposit accounts are a Liability of the banking sector. To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time. A bank loan of $1 million does this by increasing the Loans of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. Government spending of $1 million does this by increasing the Reserves of the banking sector at the same time as it credits the depositor’s bank account with $1 million. The same thing happens in reverse when a loan is repaid, or the government taxes the private sector: money is destroyed". Nonsense. Not even you believe that money is meaningless. Not that money is meaningless, just that it is created by the legal currency-creators (whether by government, or private sector banks). as noted by prof Steve Keen: "To create money, you have to increase the Liabilities of the banking sector. This is only possible if the Assets of the banking sector rise by the same amount, at the same time". Quote: The point of $1 million bank deposit is that you can withdraw it in cash or you can transfer it to someone else's account in exchange for, say, a house that is now yours. And the point is the bank can write you the loan which  enables you to withdraw the money irrespective of the bank's money reserves. [quote]You get REAL stuff when you tap your card at the shops, not just shifting deposits hither and yon. Money stands in for all that REAL stuff, not for nothing and thin air.

Correct..... Amazing, you are correct sometimes.

But here's the bit you are missing: money "stands in for Real  stuff, but is itself created out of nothing.

(just likes the points  used to keep score in a sporting match).


[/quote]

Yours is a naive,  banal argument: the sign is only the signifier, not the signified. D'oh!

Magritte did it better than you or MMT.

https://www.idesign.wiki/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/300px-MagrittePipe-300x210.jpg

Frank wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 1:24pm:

Yours is a naive,  banal argument: the sign is only the signifier, not the signified. D'oh! Magritte did it better than you or MMT. https://www.idesign.wiki/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/300px-MagrittePipe-300x210.jpg

That is a picture of a pipe.

Hint:  show us a picture of 'money' without any particular national sign or denomination.....

Then you will discover the difference between the 'sign' (picture) of a real object, and the 'sign' of a non-real entity , eg, a point, and indeed money, used to represent/measure the value of real objects ie, scores of real goals achieved, or real output produced, respectively.      

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 1:39pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 1:24pm: Yours is a naive,  banal argument: the sign is only the signifier, not the signified. D'oh! Magritte did it better than you or MMT. https://www.idesign.wiki/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/300px-MagrittePipe-300x210.jpg That is a picture of a pipe. Hint:  show us a picture of 'money' without any particular national sign or denomination..... Then you will discover the difference between the 'sign' (picture) of a real object, and the 'sign' of a non-real entity , eg, a point, and indeed money, used to represent/measure the value of real objects ie, scores of real goals achieved, or real output produced, respectively.

You are naive,  banal - and now stupid: "Show me sign of anything without showing a sign of it", you ask.

Frank wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 1:48pm:

[quote author=AusbetterWorld link=1645944963/137#137 date=1651203579][quote author=Frank link=1645944963/136#136 date=1651202652] You are naive,  banal - and now stupid: "Show me sign of anything without showing a sign of it", you ask.

No that's not what I said.

Which proves you can't show us a picture either of "money" used to represent value of something real,  or a "point" used to keep the score of game......

Why is that?

It's because money, like points, represents real value, but is not value itself which resides in the goods and services, and goals achieved, respectively. 

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 2:12pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 1:48pm: [quote author=AusbetterWorld link=1645944963/137#137 date=1651203579][quote author=Frank link=1645944963/136#136 date=1651202652] You are naive,  banal - and now stupid: "Show me sign of anything without showing a sign of it", you ask. No that's not what I said. Which proves you can't show us a picture either of "money" used to represent value of something real,  or a "point" used to keep the score of game...... Why is that? It's because money, like points, represents real value, but is not value itself which resides in the goods and services, and goals achieved, respectively.

Nothing is value itself except in context - see Midas.

You are trying to explain away the established contexts of political economy, finance, commerce and exchange.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 1:39pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 29th, 2022 at 1:24pm: Yours is a naive,  banal argument: the sign is only the signifier, not the signified. D'oh! Magritte did it better than you or MMT. https://www.idesign.wiki/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/300px-MagrittePipe-300x210.jpg That is a picture of a pipe. Hint:  show us a picture of 'money' without any particular national sign or denomination.....

Stupid.

Show us a picture of "value" without any particular sign.

Frank wrote on Apr 29^th, 2022 at 3:03pm:

Nothing is value itself except in context - see Midas.

Finally, we see why your understanding of money is flawed.

Water (and food)  is value in itself, regardless of context (or Midas). 


Quote:

You are trying to explain away the established contexts of political economy, finance, commerce and exchange.

Yes,  because those "established contexts" - which amount to flat-earth economics - are based on erroneous concepts of value measured in money terms.

As shown above, resources have value in themselves, whereas money is only a representation of the intrinsic value of real resources, which is immeasurable and constant - unlike the value of money which is subject to change and which in any case is always created out of nothing. 


Quote:

Show us a picture of "value" without any particular sign.

I can't, and that's my point. Intrinsic value (ie, value in itself) can't be represented by a sign, as a real resource can be represented by a picture.

Hence money - which only represents intrinsic value, but is not that value itself, cannot be pictured.

To repeat, water can be pictured, whereas its intrinsic value (whether represented/measured  by money or not) can't be pictured.   

Money does not represent intrinsic value, it represent exchange value.
Value, whether intrinsic or exchange or any other kind, is always contextual, it cannot be any other way, ever, since value is  about ranking, about comparison and you cannot have a ranking of one. You cannot have 'best' without good and better as well as bad worse and worst.

Money operates in a complex network of values and rankings and conventions and traditions, not unlike language and other  symbols and signs.  In each context we operate within constraints IN ORDER TO convey meaning.  Printing money without the corresponding things that money symbolises simply decouples the symbol from its signifier and thereby demeans and devalues it - inflation, economic chaos, loss of trust, loss of meaning. It's like lying and other forms that betray trust and promise.

Your mind is too nobbled by paradoxical and absurd slogans that you simply cannot look at critically. A very CCP-trained (ie straight-jacketed) mind.

Frank wrote on Apr 30^th, 2022 at 2:25pm:

Money does not represent intrinsic value, it represent exchange value.

Ok, money represents  the exchange value of real resources which have intrinsic value. That's why bronze-age (barter) communities functioned without money.


Quote:

Value, whether intrinsic or exchange or any other kind, is always contextual, it cannot be any other way, ever, since value is  about ranking, about comparison and you cannot have a ranking of one.

An error; pre-state money was based on one shell, one token or whatever, being the basic unit of exchange. (hence later on, one cent, one penny etc.).


Quote:

You cannot have 'best' without good and better as well as bad worse and worst.

The intrinsic value of an orange remains real, though its exchange value may vary. This is what I think you mean by "context".


Quote:

Money operates in a complex network of values and rankings and conventions and traditions, not unlike language and other  symbols and signs.

Money is a very specific representation which is confined to representation of exchange value.  Other signs and symbols have myriad uses, eg in language, maths, music and science. 


Quote:

In each context we operate within constraints IN ORDER TO convey meaning.

Yes, but your original  premise re money was wrong, ie exchange value and intrinsic value are not fixed and do not necessarily match.   


Quote:

Printing money without the corresponding things that money symbolises simply decouples the symbol from its signifier and thereby demeans and devalues it - inflation, economic chaos, loss of trust, loss of meaning. It's like lying and other forms that betray trust and promise.

Again -  wrong conclusion draw from wrong premise, as noted above.


Quote:

Your mind is too nobbled by paradoxical and absurd slogans that you simply cannot look at critically. A very CCP-trained (ie straight-jacketed) mind.

I thank you for drawing our attention to the difference between the indeterminate intrinsic value of a resource (ie without reference to money, a resource might be 'priceless'/essential, even if an 'exchange value is created for it);  compared with an accepted exchange value' in terms of money, usually determined in a market (subject to market failure).   



[/quote]

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 30^th, 2022 at 10:13pm:

Frank wrote on Apr 30th, 2022 at 2:25pm: Money does not represent intrinsic value, it represent exchange value. Ok, money represents  the exchange value of real resources which have intrinsic value. That's why bronze-age (barter) communities functioned without money. Quote: Value, whether intrinsic or exchange or any other kind, is always contextual, it cannot be any other way, ever, since value is  about ranking, about comparison and you cannot have a ranking of one. An error; pre-state money was based on one shell, one token or whatever, being the basic unit of exchange. (hence later on, one cent, one penny etc.). [quote]You cannot have 'best' without good and better as well as bad worse and worst.

The intrinsic value of an orange remains real, though its exchange value may vary. This is what I think you mean by "context".


Quote:

Money operates in a complex network of values and rankings and conventions and traditions, not unlike language and other  symbols and signs.

Money is a very specific representation which is confined to representation of exchange value.  Other signs and symbols have myriad uses, eg in language, maths, music and science. 


Quote:

In each context we operate within constraints IN ORDER TO convey meaning.

Yes, but your original  premise re money was wrong, ie exchange value and intrinsic value are not fixed and do not necessarily match.   


Quote:

Printing money without the corresponding things that money symbolises simply decouples the symbol from its signifier and thereby demeans and devalues it - inflation, economic chaos, loss of trust, loss of meaning. It's like lying and other forms that betray trust and promise.

Again -  wrong conclusion draw from wrong premise, as noted above.


Quote:

Your mind is too nobbled by paradoxical and absurd slogans that you simply cannot look at critically. A very CCP-trained (ie straight-jacketed) mind.

I thank you for drawing our attention to the difference between the indeterminate intrinsic value of a resource (ie without reference to money, a resource might be 'priceless'/essential, even if an 'exchange value is created for it);  compared with an accepted exchange value' in terms of money, usually determined in a market (subject to market failure).   


[/quote]

You are an idiot.   An incoherent, and ignorant,  yet strident and vigorous idiot. But being strident and vigorous is not enough.
There are millions of you. Especially in China.

If you had a mind you'd be able to mount an argument - or at least comprehend one - against your own stance. But being a mindless, stupid propaganda bot, that is completely beyond your mindset and intellectual ability.

You are good at repeating propaganda crap, but complete crap at thinking, reasoning or even rudimentary understanding ( they don't let you read widely or critically).

You are a fundamentalist, like a Muslim or a Jehovah's Witness.