Economy Global Trumpism, the rise of populism, economist Mark Blyth

[VivaRevolution]

More money does equal inflation depending economic slack and productivity of the spending (aka ROI). That is not controversial in my opinion and does not need debunking. Derping from that to jerbs guarantee is what I am highlighting as poorly substantiated. And given what you have provided as a thread (watch this video) , I have been more substantive than anyone here. Even JVS just called you a dummy and moved on.

So I was discussing MMT, because that is where the discussion went.

Are you familiar with the idea inflation driven by the policy of full employment post WWII, led to a capital strike, because if your real rate of return is 5%, and inflation is 7%, you are better off stashing your cash in the matress, hence stagflation in the 70's followed by the systemic dismantling of labors leverage that created said inflation, through the liberalization of capital, aka the neo-liberal period, until the housing bubble showed the fatal flaw of this new era?

If not, please go to the 6 minute mark, and hear this argument made much better than I just did.

 

[VivaRevolution]

He literally shows that graph, and acknowledged this argument, and then shows 2 more graphs that completely destroy this narrative.

 

[DespicablePeep]

He literally shows that graph, and acknowledged this argument, and then shows 2 more graphs that completely destroy this narrative.

sure he does

 

[VivaRevolution]

I am going to respond to what you have articulated and not watch a video and dissect it for you.

The statement that ROI matters, not spending (which I think is largely true, ie if government spends on productivity enhancing investments you don’t need to worry about inflation, especially if it uses unemployed resources) and the idea that MMT will work (specifically a job guarantee) because the world has to hold US monetary assets are in somewhat of contradiction to each other.

The stability and productivity of the US economy is what makes it the world currency (a role which has been decreasing btw) and it’s in no way a given that a job guarantee would enhance productivity, ROI, and the US economic status as as a zone of safety.

Debt, incentives, crowding out of private sector investment, etc. these are all real things. MMT tells us we exaggerate the impacts of those things by looking at govt as if it were a household. It also tells us that things like the multiplier effect are wrong headed. But it does not adequately explain why we can just pump financial assets into the system and create jobs in a vacuum without damaging incentives, productivity, and lower returns on private investment.

In summary MMT is a good launch into monetary realism and post Keynesian thought, but it falls short and becomes little more than a last refuge for Marxists and other cultists.

.

So things Blyth said that are in contradiction to you. He said the US in 1945 made up 60% of world finance, and 50% of it's trade. That this is why the US dollar became the monetary asset to hold.

By this understanding, then it is China's rise, not our fall that is a threat to our position.


As to my claim that measuring ROI of deficit spending, and not deficit spending itself, as being the core of MMT, that is what Blyth said. I was parroting him, trying to sound smart. Like I really understand MMT. About as well as I know how a derivative market actually works I guess. Which is a shit tonne for a average Joe, and at special needs level for an economist.

 

[VivaRevolution]

sure he does

It's in the video. I will actually go find the time stamp, if you will watch it. It will probably take me half an hour to find you the stamp, with me watching that video for the 3rd time in 2 days to find it.

That is how much i want anyone and everyone to watch any of what he is saying.

 

[Whippy McGee]

It's the rise of national sovereignty and making power a more localized event. Having huge Centralized Authoritarian Government is against the freedoms and liberties of all men and women.

 

[luckyshot]

It's pretty easy to learn about stuff now a days, what with the Internet and all. So maybe try that. That should probably be square one for you.

If I say "I like bananas" and then you say "how can you like bananas they're black and squishy and have mould growing on them, I'm defining them according to the 2 bananas I saw", well... there's not much discussion potential there lol

I do like the fact that you ranted about blind impulses and simple answers to complex concepts, etc, and then came out with DURRHH THAT'S WHAT I SEE GOING ON LOOK AT BREXIT THAT'S WHAT POPULISM IS!! lol smh

I gave a definition that I reached myself based on observation and critical thought. I believe populism is defined by desire for simple answers to complex questions and a distrust of expertise.

It’s actually not that easy to define a term like populism in a meaningful, non-tautological way. I gave it a shot, and I think my definition holds up to scrutiny pretty well.

If there is something inaccurate about my observation, tell me what it is. Or provide your own specific counter- ideas to discuss.

But if you are going to respond to an actual thoughtful post by saying “lol that’s dumb” and “google it,” it’s pretty clear that you don’t have shit to say.

 

[luckyshot]

It's the rise of national sovereignty and making power a more localized event. Having huge Centralized Authoritarian Government is against the freedoms and liberties of all men and women.

This is a very good example of a populist idea according to my definition; it is a simple answer that betrays a distrust of expertise.

Never mind that many things— Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Clean Air and Water Acts, Monetary policy, national security, etc.— are far better off being administered at a national level.

[QUOTE="luckyshot, post: 153913613, member: 505615"] If populism has any coherent definition, it is this: the desire for simple answers to complex problems and the conviction that expertise has no value.

So, yeah. It’s not a good thing. See the awesome state of Brexit for an example of what happens when people actually try to apply populist “methods” to actual problems.

“Populist method” is actually an oxymoron. Populism has no method. It is not able to actually design and implement any policy to actually help any situation.

It is just blind, dumb impulse.

You say Trump and Sanders brought issues to the table that no one has talked about... really? We haven’t been talking about immigration for decades? And healthcare? And the economic effects of globalism?

Talking about these things is easy. Actually figuring out something effective to do is where it gets tricky.

And yeah, politicians are often in bed with special interests, but here’s the dirty secret: the population is is often tacitly aboard.

You see this in the current healthcare debate. The populist policies poll great... except when people find out that their current coverage might actually be affected in some way. Same with economic globalization. Everybody wants good American jobs; no one wants to give up cheap shit from other countries.

But hey, you sure can get a crowd riled up. Populism is great for that.

What could possibly go wrong?

No, that this conspiracy theorism.

“Conspiracy theories are an irresistible labor-saving device in the face of complexity.”

― Henry Louis Gates

Look at all the experts on 911 and everything. Steel don't melt. Most conspiracy movements are populist movements though. You are right about that. There is massive overlap, Viva is both a conspiracy theorist

I think there is probably a fairly huge overlap between subscribers to conspiracy theories and political populist movements, as you say.

They are both characterized by a radical distrust of any kind of expert, elites, or “official” version of reality.

 

[VivaRevolution]

It's the rise of national sovereignty and making power a more localized event. Having huge Centralized Authoritarian Government is against the freedoms and liberties of all men and women.

I would send you 10 dollars to watch this video.

I think you would become very critical of the type of capitalism we currently engage in, as it makes a globalized central authority a for gone conclusion.

Not to worry though. The housing crash was a function of our current system, and we didn't really change our system. Another crash in some form is coming, and this system will exist only in the history books. Hopefully it doesn't take us all down with it.

 

[Whippy McGee]

I would send you 10 dollars to watch this video.

I think you would become very critical of the type of capitalism we currently engage in, as it makes a globalized central authority a for gone conclusion.

Not to worry though. The housing crash was a function of our current system, and we didn't really change our system. Another crash in some form is coming, and this system will exist only in the history books. Hopefully it doesn't take us all down with it.

Dude... the current Crony Capitalist state that is going is bad for the nation and world. I also agree another housing crash is coming in 2020ish. You're not telling me anything new. I have a degree in Economics.

 

[Whippy McGee]

This is a very good example of a populist idea according to my definition; it is a simple answer that betrays a distrust of expertise.

Never mind that many things— Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Clean Air and Water Acts, Monetary policy, etc.— are far better off being administered at a national level.

Apparently they are all enemies of Freedom.

ROFL! I tell you what. You let me invest my own money and opt out of Social Security and I will kick ass on the returns vs. Social Security. Also, localized medicine has shown to be far far far more effective and less expensive. Your desire for Socialism/Communism is noted and rejected.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Dude... the current Crony Capitalist state that is going is bad for the nation and world. I also agree another housing crash is coming in 2020ish. You're not telling me anything new. I have a degree in Economics.

It's not the cronyism. Capital has been liberalized. It is free to travel the world to find it's best return on investment. Our whole system on the gold standard, and with bretton woods, was designed to constrain that in every way possible.

The neo-liberal era is about capital being not bound by borders. The logical result of that is a world without borders, and a more central authority to govern those interests.

 

[VivaRevolution]

This is a very good example of a populist idea according to my definition; it is a simple answer that betrays a distrust of expertise.

Never mind that many things— Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Clean Air and Water Acts, Monetary policy, national security, etc.— are far better off being administered at a national level.


I think there is probably a fairly huge overlap between subscribers to conspiracy theories and political populist movements, as you say.

They are both characterized by a radical distrust of any kind of expert, elites, or “official” version of reality.

I love appealing to authority when it confirms my bias, look at me waive around Chomsky, and this guy being an economist like a protective shield.

I hate it, when it is used against my views.

However, when you have a jury in California find against Monsanto specifically on the idea of whether Monsanto engaged in industry funded and manipulated scientific studies, or the example of big tobacco in the past, or many more examples, it really kind of sucks to get called a CT'er for questioning motives.

 

[luckyshot]

ROFL! I tell you what. You let me invest my own money and opt out of Social Security and I will kick ass on the returns vs. Social Security. Also, localized medicine has shown to be far far far more effective and less expensive. Your desire for Socialism/Communism is noted and rejected.

Interesting, because I’m fairly sure that most countries with nationalized healthcare have far greater efficiency than us... and longer lifespans to boot!

Dude... I have a degree in Economics.

See if you can get your money back.

 

[JonesBones]

This is a very good example of a populist idea according to my definition; it is a simple answer that betrays a distrust of expertise.

Never mind that many things— Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Clean Air and Water Acts, Monetary policy, national security, etc.— are far better off being administered at a national level.


I think there is probably a fairly huge overlap between subscribers to conspiracy theories and political populist movements, as you say.

They are both characterized by a radical distrust of any kind of expert, elites, or “official” version of reality.

I kind of live by the principle of maximum boredom. The universe and world are set up to be as boring as possible. When something happens, I ask, "What is most mundane and boring explanation? That explains it." UFOs? Bigfoot? Ghosts? The way the world works? It is far too boring and complex for the conspiracy minded.

It is also similar to intelligent design. There is an irreducible complexity here. The events cannot simply be explained by their parts so a boogeyman must be invoked because all things are a product of a higher organized intelligence. lol.

Nothing is ever "hanging loose". All parts always connected to a centralized command. It is a form of Monism.

 

[luckyshot]

MMT is used a cannon fodder to back up populists however. And that’s because as a descriptive tool on how the modern economic system works, it has some good things to be said about it. But it jumps from descriptive to prescriptive (and in that way populist) in a heart beat.

I’m not arguing the theory with you; it’s way outside my wheelhouse.

I just think it’s a misuse of the term “populism” to apply it to an economic theory like this. I would consider “populist economic ideas” Tea Baggers shrieking about the National Debt or Occupy Wallstreeters descrying “the 1%.”

When’s the last time there was a big MMT rally?

I kind of live by the principle of maximum boredom. The universe and world are set up to be as boring as possible. When something happens, I ask, "What is most mundane and boring explanation? That explains it." UFOs? Bigfoot? Ghosts? The way the world works? It is far too boring and complex for the conspiracy minded.

It is also similar to intelligent design. There is an irreducible complexity here. The events cannot simply be explained by their parts so a boogeyman must be invoked because all things are a product of a higher organized intelligence. lol.

Nothing is ever "hanging loose". All parts always connected to a centralized command. It is a form of Monism.

Lol, I guess where this theory fails is that it would presumably be much more boring to have NO universe at all... so, apparently boredom doesn’t quite work as a supreme cosmological principle.

I do agree that Occum’s razor is a useful tools in many mundane situations, though.

 

[VivaRevolution]

When’s the last time there was a big MMT rally?

D....do...do you want to have one?

I mean I'm down if you are.

 

[luckyshot]

D....do...do you want to have one?

I mean I'm down if you are.

I’m more of a “Human BE-In” type guy when it comes to the whole populist rally scene... but, I mean, I’m sure my fellow hippies will listen and say “Far out.” Some of them might think that MMT is a drug.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I’m more of a “Human BE-In” type guy when it comes to the whole populist rally scene... but, I mean, I’m sure my fellow hippies will listen and say “Far out.”

"Did I mention that MMT also includes free weed?"

I should be a politician. I'm good at this pandering stuff.

 

[Gandhi]

So I was discussing MMT, because that is where the discussion went.

Are you familiar with the idea inflation driven by the policy of full employment post WWII, led to a capital strike, because if your real rate of return is 5%, and inflation is 7%, you are better off stashing your cash in the matress, hence stagflation in the 70's followed by the systemic dismantling of labors leverage that created said inflation, through the liberalization of capital, aka the neo-liberal period, until the housing bubble showed the fatal flaw of this new era?

If not, please go to the 6 minute mark, and hear this argument made much better than I just did.

Dude I am not going to the x minute mark of anything. Quote him and / or make your argument. If you can unpack things well enough to make a cogent argument I am game to respond but what you wrote above is like the ice cream headache of sherdog posts so no bueano.