<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div><span>Old redistribution ideas concerning the raising of funds by governments (via tax), and NGOs (via donations) is old backward thinking. The present economic system is more suited to "stone age" man rather than modern humanity.</span></div><div><br><span></span></div><div><span>See my project.</span></div><div><br><span></span></div><div><span>http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Transfinancial_Economics<br></span></div><div><br></div><div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><div style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><font size="2" face="Arial"><hr size="1"><b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> "ideasinc@ee.net" <ideasinc@ee.net><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> P2P Foundation mailing list
<p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org><br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Saturday, 10 September 2011, 15:11<br><b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [P2P-F] MMT/FEASTA...<br></font><br>Michael, this reply is more specific to your recollection of the MMT <br>presentation/Q&A in Dublin.<br><br><br><br>> however, I came out less than enthusiastic ..<br>><br>> the reason is the following, one of the ladies who gave the lecture, <br>> gave an<br>> intro with the main principles of MMT, and one of the rules sounds really<br>> simplistic supply-side to me<br><br>Michael, what your impression and description of what you were told does <br>seem like a repackaging of supply side economics, and the crux is in the <br>details. It was in my opinion that what was described is actually the same <br>economistic thinking that attempts to validate what is known as
the <br>"Laffer Curve." And then there is a caveat/disclaimer. A lot of the pseudo <br>MMT stuff is wrapped around a very specific and neo-classical re-visionism <br>that was applied to J. M. Keynes's body of works. J.M.K. evolved his own <br>thinking and insights relative to economics over his life span. He started <br>out as a neo-classical economist with an usually high sense of social <br>integrity and responsibility, as evidenced early with his "Economic <br>Consequences Of The Peace." The group of economists who identify <br>themselves as post-Keynesians, which includes the MMT people begin from <br>the position and theory developed in Keynes's later work.<br><br>It is also very true that Keynes's legacy has been abused by the familiar <br>neo-classical ..."savants," Specifically Milton Friedman as a transition <br>ploy to corrupt Keynes theoretical contributions to serve
otherwise <br>contrary interests. At the time the public reputation of Keynes was very <br>high post WWII, the politicals generally avoided Keynes's proposals. Joan <br>Robinson a former associate and collaborator has described with strong <br>authority that this ploy should be described as "bastard Keynesianism."<br><br>Taxation within the MMT/Functional Fiscal finance at the sovereign <br>(Federal) level is a way to control the concentration of wealth, and <br>through the accelerating lobbying efforts a progress tax code has been <br>replaced with a an entirely regressive application of taxation. Deficit <br>spending under the bastard Keynesianism (neo-classical economics in <br>costume) as enabled by the misrepresentation of Keynes used under the <br>privatization "deficit" spending. Deficit spending when the government is <br>a sovereign state can be issued entirely debt free, much as
the US <br>Continentals and the US Greenbacks were used. Taking back the sovereign <br>power to issue currency does not even need legislative approval, just the <br>information and the political integrity to decline massive levels of <br>bribery.<br><br>With regard for Keynes's effort to raise the awareness of the demand side <br>of the economy a tax holiday for the producing classes is a Keynesian/MMT <br>concept through and through. The generalization that this applies to all <br>form of taxation is bluntly ignorant. The MMT/Post-Keynesians also more <br>importantly advocate for countercyclical intervention in the creation of <br>basic living wage jobs. The same set of assumptions, ie legitimate <br>MMT/FF/Minsky et al, can be also applied to define "social <br>infrastructure," such as education and health care as extensions of the <br>commons.<br><br>Yes, to the extent that
taxation could reduce spendable income by <br>individuals, yes that could cause the economy to slow down further. <br>Corporations and particularly banking corporations currently don't have <br>that constraint at all currently through the episodes of "Quantitative <br>Easing" (Neo Classical wizardry of the golden oz.) hiring in response to <br>demand will just not happen. So this part is just backwards at best, and <br>worse simply illiterate even by intention.<br><br>Taxation under a Georgist application of economics as a commons state and <br>local taxes are levied under some recognition of the source of the value <br>of infrastructure which is tha basis of community centered economics. <br>Taxation upon idle and potential assets re-directs to not tax personal <br>property by personal use. Taxation in this fashion can reduce the blight <br>of land speculation based upon valuation being
based upon the structure, <br>contrary to the potential contribution to the community economy.<br><br>enough for now, Tadit<br><br><br><br>><br>> she said, lower taxes, and the economy grows, higher taxes, and the <br>> economy<br>> slows down ...<br>><br>> Disbelieving I asked a question on this, and she confirmed, and this <br>> pretty<br>> much discredits MMT for me,<br>><br>> Michel<br>><br>> On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:27 PM, <<a ymailto="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net" href="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net">ideasinc@ee.net</a>> wrote:<br>><br>>> Michael, this is the link to Bill Mitchell's Billy Blog site and the <br>>> first<br>>> segment of 7 in total.<br>>><br>>> <a href="http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=6122" target="_blank">http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=6122</a><br>>><br>>> Mitchell is one of the top authorities on modern
monetary economics <br>>> which<br>>> is the discourse which has applied what was learned from legitimate<br>>> interpretations of Keynes and of the demand side economics of the WPA,<br>>> CCC, and NYA as progressive (U.S.) responses to the 20th century Great<br>>> Depression. Mitchell covers a list of "progressive" nominal<br>>> economists/establishments in the successive entries. L. Randall Wray of<br>>> the Univ. of Missouri Kansas City Econ. Dept has made similar statements<br>>> which would take me a bit longer to produce. The core difference is<br>>> between the economic assumptions being applied. The New Economic<br>>> Perspectives from Kansas City blog has a treasure trove of resources <br>>> both<br>>> in the current primer review and of other stand alone materials. It may<br>>> require a bit of translation. Mitchell is at the top of his class in
<br>>> terms<br>>> of modern monetary economics and as a perspective it has been one of the<br>>> few opposing perspectives relative the well funded deficit terrorism<br>>> campaigns. Some of the material may seem counter-intuitive, and it is<br>>> based upon in part how central banking actually operates currently, only<br>>> how those principles can serve a more public and more social agenda. The<br>>> counter-intuitive part derives from the neo-classical framing which has<br>>> dominated the field for decades if not longer. Ie, by its familiarity, <br>>> the<br>>> neo-classical framing seems correct when it is not actually, and serves <br>>> to<br>>> contain genuine progressive initiatives within a neo-classical box of<br>>> assumptions. On a related topic, what is known as Jevons's Paradox is<br>>> often applied within ecological and environmental circles
to "prove" the<br>>> futility of progressive energy measures and energy efficient technology,<br>>> ends up being paradoxical only within the neo-classical set of <br>>> assumptions.<br>>><br>>> as we go, Tadit<br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>><br>>> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 06:49:51 -0400, Michel Bauwens<br>>> <<a ymailto="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net" href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>> wrote:<br>>><br>>> > thanks, do you have a link to the baker critique you mention below?<br>>> ><br>>> > Michel<br>>> ><br>>> > On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:59 PM, <<a ymailto="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net" href="mailto:ideasinc@ee.net">ideasinc@ee.net</a>> wrote:<br>>> ><br>>> >> Y'all, Baker tends to have a reputation of being strong on the <br>>>
rhetoric<br>>> >> but very weak on the actual economics side of his material. It has <br>>> been<br>>> >> demonstrated that his economic assumptions are neo-liberal in their<br>>> >> substance. Though this might be an interesting foray at one level, if<br>>> >> done<br>>> >> in a less than serious fashion it is likely to promote economic<br>>> >> illiteracy. This may seem harsh, and buying into the<br>>> >> neo-liberal/neo-classical framing of our situation cuts off even<br>>> >> imagining<br>>> >> informed fiscal options. I come from primarily a post-Keynesian<br>>> >> macro-economics and functional finance perspective, and this sits <br>>> well<br>>> >> with my 20 plus years of being active in community centered economic<br>>> >> activism, from entrepreneurship development, to being
treasurer of <br>>> two<br>>> >> different cooperatives, to being downstream of fraud perpetrated <br>>> under a<br>>> >> false flag of left "progressiv-ism," and other investments regarding.<br>>> >> Just<br>>> >> finished a series of essays by Bill Mitchell which included a <br>>> critique<br>>> >> of<br>>> >> Dean Baker's economics, entitled "With Friends, Like These..."<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> Tadit Anderson, Re-Imagining Economics<br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >><br>>> >> On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 01:50:04 -0400, Michel Bauwens<br>>> >> <<a ymailto="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net" href="mailto:michel@p2pfoundation.net">michel@p2pfoundation.net</a>> wrote:<br>>> >><br>>> >> ><br>>> >><br>>> <a
href="http://deanbaker.net/images/stories/documents/End-of-Loser-Liberalism.pdf" target="_blank">http://deanbaker.net/images/stories/documents/End-of-Loser-Liberalism.pdf</a><br>>> >> ><br>>> >> > Hi Kevin, perhaps you'd find chapter 10 interesting, and even <br>>> chapter<br>>> >> 11,<br>>> >> ><br>>> >> > commentary always appreciated if you have time,<br>>> >> ><br>>> >> > Michel<br>>> >><br>>> >> _______________________________________________<br>>> >> P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>>> >> <a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>>> >> <a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>>>
>><br>>> ><br>>> ><br>>><br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br>>> <a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br>>> <a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br>>><br>><br>><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>P2P Foundation - Mailing list<br><a href="http://www.p2pfoundation.net" target="_blank">http://www.p2pfoundation.net</a><br><a href="https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation" target="_blank">https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation</a><br><br><br></div></div></div></body></html>