Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Fiscal Summit Counter-Narrative: Part Three, Are There Spending Constraints On Governments Sovereign in Their Currencies?

By Joe Firestone

An issue at the core of all the fuss about fiscal sustainability is Government solvency. The deficit hawks and doves believe that Governments sovereign in their own currency can run out of money if they keep deficit spending, and keep borrowing to do it. They believe that if deficit/debt levels are high enough, then Government insolvency can occur, because eventually the burden of interest on the public debt will crowd out all other public spending and investments. So, they are for working towards debt/deficit reduction, “reforming” (i.e. cutting) entitlement spending, and raising taxes, though not necessarily on the rich.

Continue reading

The Fiscal Summit Counter-Narrative: Part Two, Defining Fiscal Sustainability

By Joe Firestone

One of the most irritating things about the deficit hawk/austerity literature, is that it uses the ideas of “fiscal sustainability” and “fiscal responsibility” in an ideological way, without ever really analyzing or explaining these labels. It’s almost as if the austerians know that if they clearly and directly stated what they meant by these terms, and how their meanings were actually related to the ideas of “sustainability” and “responsibility”, then flaws in their whole ideological and policy framework would be very clear to everyone else.

Continue reading

Fiscal Summit Counter-Narrative: Part One

By Joe Firestone

Well, it’s Springtime in DC. Time for the Peter G. Peterson Foundation’s annual event. The Fiscal Summit, to be held on May 15, better named the Fiscal Cesspool of distortions, half-truths and lies, is a propaganda extravaganza designed to maintain and strengthen the Washington and national elite consensuses on the existence of a debt crisis, the long-term ravages of entitlement spending on America’s fiscal well-being, and the need for long-term deficit reductions plans to combat this truly phantom menace. The purpose of maintaining that consensus is to keep an impenetrable screen of fantasy intact in order to justify policies of economic austerity. that have been impoverishing people and transferring financial and real wealth to the globalizing elite comprised of the 1% or far less of the population, depending on which nation one is talking about.

The 2010 Fiscal Summit

The first “Fiscal Summit” was held in Washington, DC on April 28, 2010. It was lavishly funded by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, and included many “big names” associated with “fiscal sustainability” and “fiscal responsibility,” including Bill Clinton, who appeared along with personalities from Peterson’s stable of deficit hawks such as David Walker, Alice Rivlin. Robert Rubin, Alan Simpson, Erskine Bowles, and Paul Ryan. Its purpose was to spread the deficit hawk message of Peter G. Peterson, including various myths of the world-wide austerity movement: Continue reading

An Invitation to Brad Plumer to join us in Warning against the Folly of Austerity

By William K. Black

Yesterday, I wrote an article entitled Why Progressive Austerians do the Greatest Damage. The article was prompted by a column written by Brad Plumer. Plumer commented on my article, expressing his disagreement with my characterization of his position.

Continue reading

Ex-ECB Head Proposes Giving Greece the Benton Harbor, Michigan Treatment

By William K. Black

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder secured passage of “Public Act 4, the Local Government and School District Fiscal Accountability Act.  The Act allows the Governor to appoint emergency managers (EMs) for any government in Michigan.  The EM has unlimited dictatorial powers.  He can – and the EMs appointed by Snyder have exercised this power – effectively eliminate the elected government.  Republicans have blocked a challenge to this remarkable law; arguing that the petitions had too small a font.  Snyder has used the EM power to take over primarily cities with African-American majorities.

Chris Savage, writing in The Nation, quoted the Benton Harbor EM’s putsch:

In April the Benton Harbor EM, Joe Harris, decreed: “Absent prior express written authorization and approval by the Emergency Manager”—himself—‘no City Board, Commission or Authority shall take any action for or on behalf of the City whatsoever other than: i) Call a meeting to order, ii) Approve of meeting minutes, iii) Adjourn a meeting.’” The move in effect abolished Benton Harbor’s elected City Commission and replaced it with an unelected bureaucrat, perhaps the first time this has happened in US history.

I grew up in Michigan so I follow Snyder’s assault on democracy and African-Americans fairly closely.  I can now report that European “austerians” are following Snyder’s lead.

Continue reading

Playing Monopolis Monopoly: An inquiry into why we are making ourselves so miserable

By J. D. Alt

Why does it seem like there isn’t enough money to pay for the things we really need? The headlines are filled with stories about our nation’s “debt problem” and dire warnings about our impending “bankruptcy.” As an architect who fills his waking hours thinking up all kinds of wonderful things we could be building, I’m alarmed by the idea there isn’t enough money to pay for any of them. Before wasting more time dreaming, I had to find out: Is it really true? Are we really too poor to put America back to work making and building the things we need to maintain a prosperous nation?

Searching for an answer, I discovered a small (but growing) group of economists (see here, here, here, here, here, here) who represent an emerging school of thought known as “modern monetary theory” (MMT). These men and women are valiantly trying to make us all understand a paradigm shift that occurred some forty years ago, when the world abandoned the gold standard. Their key insight shocked me: A sovereign government is never revenue constrained when it is the Monopoly issuer of its own pure fiat currency; it has all the money that’s needed to put its citizens to work building anything—and providing any service—that is desired by the public (provided the real resources are available). Even more remarkable, sovereign “deficits” in the fiat currency are just the accounting record of the surpluses that have been injected into the private economy. Eliminating the sovereign currency deficit by imposing austerity will not make the economy healthier; it will, in effect, bankrupt the citizens!

Continue reading

Quantitative Easing and Commodity Prices: An MMT Approach

By Payam Sharifi
The author is currently pursuing his Ph.D. in Economics and Public Administration at the University of Missouri – Kansas City

One of the most common observations I make as I frequent the comments section of MMT blogs are the arguments in objection to it.  When one mentions “keystrokes”, these posters immediately think of Weimar Germany and machines printing money and throwing them out into the streets (via helicopter or otherwise).  After these commentators understand (through the help of other posters) that MMT notes that inflation is the only possible constraint to the issuer of a sovereign currency, they typically have their “gotcha” moment.  Quantitative Easing (QE), they note, has been responsible for higher commodity prices and hence, MMT’ers are a bunch of crazy fanatics who want to turn the nation and the world into Weimar (or Zimbabwe).  The even larger implication is that enacting goals for the public purpose is not something the government should be involved with.  The view that QE is responsible for higher commodity prices is not entirely without merit, but not for reasons typically ascribed to it.  By understanding the institutional aspects that MMT describes, one will understand not only the real transmission mechanism but also some other problems and solutions associated with higher energy prices.  This post makes an outline of these issues.

Continue reading

Paul Krugman’s Economic Blinders

By Michael Hudson

Paul Krugman is widely appreciated for his New York Times columns criticizing Republican demands for fiscal austerity. He rightly argues that cutting back public spending will worsen the economic depression into which we are sinking. And despite his partisan Democratic Party politicking, he warned from the outset in 2009 that President Obama’s modest counter-cyclical spending program was not sufficiently bold to spur recovery.

Continue reading

The Mania for Fiscal Austerity, “Hard Money” Ideology, and Reification of the Money Signifier

By Michael Hoexter

The economic ideology of fiscal austerity, i.e. cutting government spending as a virtue in itself, which threatens to tear apart civilization as we know it, has been sweeping through elites and right-wing groups in America and Europe.  The nominal center and Left in a number of countries are also “infected” with the “mind virus” of fiscal austerity and budget deficit phobia.  Almost every pro-social initiative that is instituted by government or relies on government funding is endangered by the onward march of this false view of how modern, large-scale economies function.  The mental state and/or group hysteria associated with fiscal austerity has caused leaders to ignore 70 years of economic wisdom as well as the obvious empirical evidence surrounding us that their collective austerity mania is leading to economic and physical damage to the vast majority of people in numerous societies.  The recent electoral victory of the French Socialist, Francois Hollande, thought to be an opponent of austerity, may lead to a temporary break in the political and technocratic front in favor of austerity but the battle is not yet won.  Hollande’s support for “anti-austerity” does not seem to be principled and backed by a complete counter-theory to austerian madness.

Continue reading

Mario Draghi’s Vision of The Future European Worker

By Klaus Hagendorf

Below is a statement from the President of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi (Press conference, Barcelona, 3 Mai 2012):

“What does this growth compact mean? It refers to a variety of ideas that have been expressed in a number of places, and I certainly don’t claim any patent on this concept. But, if one had to summarise, it means basically three things. First of all, there must be a continuation of structural reforms in all the economies of the euro area. These structural reforms are different for different countries, but one can find some common themes. The first common area is the set of structural reforms in product markets. Our minds go back to the need to complete the single market as a first step, and to increase competition. You have to reform the product markets and the labour markets together, because you have to have more competition in both. Labour market reforms have three features: first they should increase flexibility, second they should increase mobility, and third, they should also increase equity in the labour market. Now we basically have a situation which is imbalanced against young people. Youth unemployment rates are going up and this is because of distortions in the labour market at the present time. You also want to make sure that you have an unemployment insurance system that makes these mobility and flexibility requirements realistic.”

When economic experts talk this way about the necessary measures to assure the exit from the economic crisis, I can’t help it but get the impression that what these “experts” have in mind looks something like this:

The Future European Worker – mobile, flexible, ready for everything at an affordable price.

Following the daily news there come protests from all sites.  My studies in the MIME project have led me to the clear answer:  Against this doctrine we have to wage the strategy of “Controlling Capital.”  To learn more, please visit http://eurodos.free.fr/mime or http://eurodos.free.fr/cocnet