This is the first part of a series on framing money.
I studied with Hyman Minsky in the early 1980s when he was writing his 1986 book (Stabilizing an Unstable Economy). There are two phrases in that book that I remember him saying in class:
“Anyone can create money, the problem lies in getting it accepted”.
By Dan Kervick
Matt Yglesias is now hawking an initial White House budget proposal that is apparently being negotiated by Tim Geithner. Predictably, the two-stage proposal involves entitlement “savings” and cuts in both stage one and stage two, and backs off a bit on higher tax rates on the rich. In exchange, the White House gets some more stimulus spending. Yglesias advises Republicans to tell Obama:
… he can have his stimulus and he can even have higher tax revenue if he really wants it, but that the price is giving up his obsession with higher rates. Is he more interested in soaking the rich or in creating jobs? I don’t think Obama says no to a deal like that, and if he does lots of sensible liberals (like this guy) will call him out on it. Then we can put this sorry episode behind us, proclaim the Grand Bargaining Era done for, and hopefully move on to other things.
It seems strange to endorse a grand bargain in order to move on and proclaim the Grand Bargaining Era over. Maybe next week Democrats should propose the elimination of the minimum wage so we can then declare an end to the Era of the Fight Over the Minimum Wage?
Posted in Dan Kervick
Tagged Matt Yglesias, MMT, Modern Monetary Theory, Taxes, the Fed, The National Debt
Warren Buffett’s recent op-ed in the New York Times is making a stir because it calls for a minimum tax on high incomes above $One million annually. But I was much more interested in some deficit targeting he proposes which exposes his ignorance about the sectoral financial balances model of macro-economics, and reveals him as a deficit hawk whose advice, if followed would be unsustainable and lead the United States into another deep recession. I’ll comment on a couple of paragraphs in Buffett’s op-ed. Continue reading
The favorite defense of Social Security by progressives harkens back to Franklin Roosevelt who famously said:
By Thornton (Tip) Parker
This discussion goes beyond MMT and MS, and advocates of those ideas may or may not agree. Much written here is prefaced with “I think”.
Wealth and income concentration: The claim that money in the hands of the wealthy trickles down through the economy is just backward. Money is like cream—it rises to the top. In 2007, the ten percent with the highest incomes received nearly half of all personal incomes in the country. This concentration was not just due to merit, much of it was structural, institutional, and rent seeking. In part because of Occupy, the public is gradually becoming aware of this fundamental problem. Continue reading
Obama for America, the campaign apparatus with the very large e-mailing list and great segmentation techniques that exploited Romney’s weaknesses to help the President to eke out (yes, I know the electoral vote involved no “eking out,” but the popular vote was something else again) his re-election victory, is now trying to mobilize people who voted for the President to work against their own interests by supporting his deficit/debt cutting activities. So, I couldn’t resist the following commentary on their mobilization e-mail. Continue reading
By J. D. Alt
You know those radio collars they put on grizzly bears, so they can track where they go through the bushes and forests? Well, I’m pleased to announce they’ve developed a radio collar that fits on a U.S. Dollar. (This was a particular accomplishment since most U.S. Dollars now are electronic, the essence of their existence coded on magnetic discs, the embodied code appearing and disappearing, disc to disc, not unlike the quarks and neutrinos of quantum mechanics.) Without going into how they did it, then, we can simply announce that now we can track a U.S. Dollar through the bushes and forests of our economy and, hopefully, on this episode of NATURE, discover the roots and results of wasteful government spending. Continue reading
Robert Reich has been writing a series on “the Grand Bargain” and the “fiscal cliff.” In this post, I’ll do a commentary on his “The President’s Opening Bid on a Grand Bargain (II): Put a Trigger Mechanism in the Legislation”, because I think it’s a good example of self-defeating progressivism or “loser liberalism”. Take your choice of epithet.
Like many others, I’m not worried about the so-called fiscal “cliff,” and the ravages to the economy that are likely to occur if Congress doesn’t do something about it before the end of the year. That’s because a lot of the impact can be cushioned in the short run by Executive Branch manipulations while negotiations continue to go on. But if measures aren’t taken to reverse the contractionary effect of the sequestration-induced changes, we’re looking at deficit cuts of $487 Billion over 9 months of the fiscal year. Continue reading
By J. D. Alt
In Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal (Capital Journal, Looking Past Fiscal Cliff to a Genuine Tax Overhaul) Gerald Seib lays out a very sensible argument about why the U.S. tax code needs to be rewritten “for the 21st century.” He points out that the tax code we are using was created in 1913 (before the Great Depression and the New Deal, I might add) and was last revised in any meaningful way in 1986—“before the Internet had any commercial use, before most of us had cellphones, before the U.S. began running $1 trillion annual deficits, before the oldest baby boomers retired, before income inequality had become a global phenomenon, before the advent of the euro, and before China, rather than Japan, became America’s main economic competitor.” Continue reading
Click images to view details
