[Steve_American]

Mainstream policies are mainstream because they work, well most of the time. MMT is not exactly non-mainstream nowadays also so....

As a matter of fact, you can't be not noticing the inflation large chunk of it is that packages from all over the world not only the US. Yes, the current instability contributed to it for gas prices or oil prices for example but that is only like 25-75% of that inflation depending on the place. US is on the low side of that contribution while Europe depending on the country is on the bigger side.

Currently, MMT is getting more of a hearing. However, its policy suggestions are being totally ignored.
The difference between MMT & MS Econ. theories is that MMT isn't based on any false assumptions, while I have proven with posts by leading economists that MS Econ. is, in fact, based totally on deductive logic, with false premises, and so totally incorrect deductive reasoning. It ignores economic reality in its proofs.

Does MS Econ. theory "work". That depends on what you mean by work. I have asked for people to list MS Econ. predictions that were accurate. I have gotten zero replies. So, nobody can think of any MS predictions that were accurate. For me, this means that MS Econ. doesn't work. In real sciences the proof of a theory is in its accurate predictions. MS Econ. has very few, and many failed predictions, for example, the 30 years of bad predictions about the Japanese economy.

If 75% of current US inflation has been caused by things other than the size of the "stimulus" support for the people and economy during the pandemic, then the Fed should not be raising interest rates to cause a recession and damage the Dems in the election, because only 2 percentage points of the 8% inflation was caused by the stimulus. Every MMTer I know of has rejected interest rate increases. This is a stark difference between MMT and MS Econ.

In summary, MS Econ. Theory does NOT work and never has. It was a scam from the beginning. The theory started with the conclusions it wanted to prove and then invented the necessary premises to let it make that proof. But, most of those created premises are obviously false. And, you can't have any false premises in a valid proof.

.

[BlutoSays]

Steve, you're painfully wrong and you're boring the shit outta me. You know what happens when I get bored.

[Puffer Fish]

Basic things economists have known for many, many decades:

-When you dump historic amounts of stimulus cash into an economy you will cause inflation and heat up an economy.

-When you push up interest rates quickly you will cool an economy or cause a recession.

These idiots in government helped cause both the inflation and the recent economic downturn.

Of course, once there is inflation in the first place, then they have to "push up interest rates" (actually: stop keeping interest rates down) otherwise it will cause even more inflation at a faster pace.

(In fact, if they attempted to keep interest rates at a constant low rate, and refused to want to allow it to budge, it would theoretically trigger a spiral of inflation that would keep growing worse and worse. The more difference there is between the inflation rate and interest rates, the more expensive it becomes to keep those interest rates down, and it causes more inflation. It's like a feedback effect)

Most economists generally agree that interest rates going up will lead to recession, but it is a more complicated than that and that is only actually a partial truth.
If you want to discuss that further, you can do so in this thread:
Inflation is "needed" to prevent recession
viewtopic.php?f=9&t=182113

In my opinion, keeping interest rates down is kind of just like another form of "stimulus". It is no more a long-term solution than a tired person drinking coffee to stay awake and not have to sleep.

[Rancid]

One claim being put forward is that inflation is the price we have to pay for de-globalization and decoupling from China. According to Zeihan anyway.

IF he is right, I say let's pay it.

[Potemkin]

One claim being put forward is that inflation is the price we have to pay for de-globalization and decoupling from China. According to Zeihan anyway.

IF he is right, I say let's pay it.

People in the West want cheap shit, and we need China to supply that cheap shit. We’re junkies and China is the pusher.

[Rancid]

People in the West want cheap shit, and we need China to supply that cheap shit. We’re junkies and China is the pusher.

Agree. We would sell human rights for a nickle.

[Steve_American]

People in the West want cheap shit, and we need China to supply that cheap shit. We’re junkies and China is the pusher.

Actually, it isn't really the people in the West who want cheap shit. Let me explain.

It is corps who moved the factories overseas to make more profit by making cheap stuff.
This closing of American factories caused real wages to be flat.
This meant that the people needed to buy the cheapest stuff.
Just because the people can't afford better stuff doesn't mean that they want cheap shit.

So, it is corps wanting higher and higher profits from making and selling cheaper and cheaper stuff, that makes the people need to buy cheap shit.

.

[Potemkin]

Actually, it isn't really the people in the West who want cheap shit. Let me explain.

It is corps who moved the factories overseas to make more profit by making cheap stuff.
This closing of American factories caused real wages to be flat.
This meant that the people needed to buy the cheapest stuff.
Just because the people can't afford better stuff doesn't mean that they want cheap shit.

So, it is corps wanting higher and higher profits from making and selling cheaper and cheaper stuff, that makes the people need to buy cheap shit.

.

Yep, and it’s a beautiful system. Even Tommy Lucchese himself would have admired the racket the capitalists have created. And the best of it is that nobody wants it to change. Not the West’s corporations, not the Chinese, not even the poor saps being ripped off by the racket. It’s a beautiful thing. Badda-bing, badda-boom!

[Saeko]

People in the West want cheap shit, and we need China to supply that cheap shit. We’re junkies and China is the pusher.

Are you saying that the government should immediately shoot anybody caught buying or selling cheap things?

Because I kinda like that idea.

[Drlee]

Sometimes economic theory fails on the street. More practical observations are useful.

Yesterday I went into a "dollar store". As I walked past a shelf I noticed that a bottle of no-name bleach was over $5.00. A year ago this would have been $3.00. That does not represent supply issues or the kind of inflation numbers we are seeing. It is simply a conscious grab for profits using inflation as an excuse. My MacDonalds two cheeseburger meal was almost $10.00. Literally double what it was a year ago. That is not supply, or labor costs. It is simply a grab for profits. A year ago I could buy a car wash for $6.99. That same car wash today is $15.99. Again. Not explainable by cost of doing business. Of course the soaring cost of housing follows the same reasoning.

The bottom line is that, in many cases, this economic disaster is fueled by a combination of greed and fear. Greed for ready money and fear of getting behind the inflation curve. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Nixon stopped a similar inflation rate with wage and price controls. He was able to do this because American workers were already earning a living wage with benefits. We have taken that away from over half of American workers in favor of higher corporate profits. So now this option is not available. People won't hunker down now. They know, because the government has done it, that they government will just give them money to not work. Just did.

[BlutoSays]

So now that gasoline prices have fallen a little bit, should we thank Putin or the people and families that have cancelled their summer and fall vacation and travel plans, lowering demand for gasoline?

BTW, what's on the shelf trails inflation numbers. It takes a while from manufacturing to purchase to take place.


"He was able to do this because American workers were already earning a living wage with benefits." - sorry, filling out spreadsheets from home or being another middleman on a sales call is not the same as manufacturing a car on the assembly line (and all the tens of thousands of US suppliers of parts that have long since gone our of business in favor of Asia building it). Living wage? If you want a living wage, you actually have to produce! Take a look at the companies on the "Dow Jones Industrial". How many are "Industrial"? Hint: they renamed it.

[Rancid]

Sometimes economic theory fails on the street. More practical observations are useful.

Yesterday I went into a "dollar store". As I walked past a shelf I noticed that a bottle of no-name bleach was over $5.00. A year ago this would have been $3.00. That does not represent supply issues or the kind of inflation numbers we are seeing. It is simply a conscious grab for profits using inflation as an excuse. My MacDonalds two cheeseburger meal was almost $10.00. Literally double what it was a year ago. That is not supply, or labor costs. It is simply a grab for profits. A year ago I could buy a car wash for $6.99. That same car wash today is $15.99. Again. Not explainable by cost of doing business. Of course the soaring cost of housing follows the same reasoning.

The bottom line is that, in many cases, this economic disaster is fueled by a combination of greed and fear. Greed for ready money and fear of getting behind the inflation curve. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Nixon stopped a similar inflation rate with wage and price controls. He was able to do this because American workers were already earning a living wage with benefits. We have taken that away from over half of American workers in favor of higher corporate profits. So now this option is not available. People won't hunker down now. They know, because the government has done it, that they government will just give them money to not work. Just did.

When it comes to goods like say phones, or TVs, bikes, whatever, I don't have a problem with this behavior from corporations. Usually there is enough competition to keep a damper on this. For example, Apple typically charges $50 more on similarly spec'ed phones when compared to say Google/Samsung. Why? Not because their phones are better, but simply because they can do it. They have that brand power. They're just going to charge more because they can get away with it.

However, this shouldn't be done/allowed with things like Food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities. These items are too critical to be left up to a system that only optimizes profits (and doesn't give a shit about optimizing wellbeing), which is what capitalism does.

[BlutoSays]

When it comes to goods like say phones, or TVs, bikes, whatever, I don't have a problem with this behavior from corporations. Usually there is enough competition to keep a damper on this. For example, Apple typically charges $50 more on similarly spec'ed phones when compared to say Google/Samsung. Why? Not because their phones are better, but simply because they can do it. They have that brand power. They're just going to charge more because they can get away with it.

However, this shouldn't be done/allowed with things like Food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities. These items are too critical to be left up to a system that only optimizes profits (and doesn't give a shit about optimizing wellbeing), which is what capitalism does.

BS. Someone works and owns the means to provide food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities.

I get that you are against private property rights. Don't care. Stay the hell away from what doesn't belong to you or pay for it.

[Rancid]

Someone works and owns the means to provide food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities.

So?

I get that you are against private property rights

I'm not.

You're a dummy though, so I'm not surprised you jump to this.

[late]

BS. Someone works and owns the means to provide food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities.

I get that you are against private property rights. Don't care. Stay the hell away from what doesn't belong to you or pay for it.

Capitalism has always depended on government to make it work.

This is no different. The government needs to make competition possible. We did it before, in the era of the Robber Barons, and the situation is even worse now.

[Drlee]

@Rancid However, this shouldn't be done/allowed with things like Food, housing, healthcare (including over the counter products and house old cleaning and hygiene supplies), education, and basic life necessities. These items are too critical to be left up to a system that only optimizes profits (and doesn't give a shit about optimizing wellbeing), which is what capitalism does.

I agree. It is time for price controls. We can stomp inflation overnight by doing what Nixon (R) did. He froze prices and wages.

@BlutoSays assertion that all jobs that do not make stuff are inconsequential to the economy is bullshit. Maybe he will try a lecture on sovereign citizens next.

@late You are absolutely correct. Capitalism, as it has been experienced in the free world for centuries, requires careful control from government. Whether you go back to the guilds in times of old or copyright law today, capitalism requires government.

Want an example of how this works. Because a bunch of lawmakers wanted to suck the tits of Pharma the federal government, largest buyer of drugs in the world, is not allowed to negotiate price. If this law was repealed (and there is an effort by the Biden administration to do it) the cost of drugs for all Americans would plummet. Amazon is given the opportunity to ship via the USPS at a cost that even Walmart can't approach. Free access highways benefit business. Subsidized trains. Subsidized employee health care. And yes, even subsidized retirement all benefit business. And with all this help did the people get a break? Not hardly. They got the bill.

America has 724 billionaires. Their net worth is greater than the total wealth of the continent of Africa. They are worth more than the total wealth of Switzerland or Taiwan. They could literally buy Belgium. Prefer GDP? Their net worth is greater than the GDP of Germany. About the same as Canada, Italy and France combined.

My fellow Republicans go into a fit whenever anyone uses the term "fair" but such a thing exists. If we were to spread this wealth around a bit, by not subsidizing it with tax money for example, we would all be better off.

But NOOOO. That is SOCIALISM Well it is not but there are no members of the Republican party who are smart enough to know that. (Except the leadership, which was purchased by the folks long ago.)

[Rancid]

Capitalism also requires a big ass military.

[Istanbuller]

Capitalism also requires a big ass military.

It doesn't. Capitalism and free trade require a peaceful environment where countries do not clash.

The British Empire and later the US required big militaries because they faced existential threats from non democratic countries. If there weren't such threats, you wouldn't need to feed large militaries.

[Saeko]

It doesn't. Capitalism and free trade require a peaceful environment where countries do not clash.

The British Empire and later the US required big militaries because they faced existential threats from non democratic countries. If there weren't such threats, you wouldn't need to feed large militaries.

Oh, the childlike innocence... Soooo cute...



*pinches Istanbuller's wittle cheeks*

[Truth To Power]

It doesn't. Capitalism and free trade require a peaceful environment where countries do not clash.

The British Empire and later the US required big militaries because they faced existential threats from non democratic countries. If there weren't such threats, you wouldn't need to feed large militaries.

Bless your heart....