Groupthink and Denial on a Grand Scale


bill mitchell1 bill mitchell2

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Trump Policy Will Unravel Traditional Neocons


Trump Policy Will Unravel Traditional Neocons

….HUDSON: Well, Krugman has joined the ranks of the neocons, as well as the neoliberals, and they’re terrified that they’re losing control of the Republican Party. For the last half-century the Republican Party has been pro-Cold War, corporatist. And Trump has actually, is reversing that. Reversing the whole traditional platform. And that really worries the neocons.
Until his speech, the whole Republican Convention, every speaker had avoided dealing with economic policy issues. No one referred to the party platform, which isn’t very good. And it was mostly an attack on Hillary. Chants of “lock her up.” And Trump children, aimed to try to humanize him and make him look like a loving man.
But finally came Trump’s speech, and this was for the first time, policy was there. And he’s making a left run around Hillary. He appealed twice to Bernie Sanders supporters, and the two major policies that he outlined in the speech broke radically from the Republican traditional right-wing stance. And that is called destroying the party by the right wing, and Trump said he’s not destroying the party, he’s building it up and appealing to labor, and appealing to the rational interest that otherwise had been backing Bernie Sanders.
So in terms of national security, he wanted to roll back NATO spending. And he made it clear, roll back military spending. We can spend it on infrastructure, we can spend it on employing American labor. And in the speech, he said, look, we don’t need foreign military bases and foreign spending to defend our allies. We can defend them from the United States, because in today’s world, the only kind of war we’re going to have is atomic war. Nobody’s going to invade another country. We’re not going to send American troops to invade Russia, if it were to attack. So nobody’s even talking about that. So let’s be realistic.
Well, being realistic has driven other people crazy. Not only did Krugman say that Trump would, quote, actually follow a pro-Putin foreign policy at the expense of America’s allies, and he’s referring to the Ukraine, basically, and it’s at–he’s become a lobbyist for the military-industrial complex. But also, at the Washington Post you had Anne Applebaum call him explicitly the Manchurian candidate, referring to the 1962 movie, and rejecting the neocon craziness. This has just driven them nutty because they’re worried of losing the Republican Party under Trump.
In economic policy, Trump also opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the TTIP trade and corporate power grab [inaud.] with Europe to block public regulation. And this was also a major plank of Bernie Sanders’ campaign against Hillary, which Trump knows. The corporatist wings of both the Republican and the Democratic Parties fear that Trump’s opposition to NAFTA and TPP will lead the Republicans not to push through in the lame duck session after November. The whole plan has been that once the election’s over, Obama will then get all the Republicans together and will pass the Republican platform that he’s been pushing for the last eight years. The Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement with Europe, and the other neoliberal policies.
And now that Trump is trying to rebuild the Republican Party, all of that is threatened. And so on the Republican side of the New York Times page you had David Brooks writing “The death of the Republican Party.” So what Trump calls the rebirth of the Republican Party, it means the death of the reactionary, conservative, corporatist, anti-labor Republican Party.
And when he wrote this, quote, Trump is decimating the things Republicans stood for: NATO, entitlement reform, in other words winding back Social Security, and support of the corporatist Trans-Pacific Partnership. So it’s almost hilarious to see what happens. And Trump also has reversed the traditional Republican fiscal responsibility austerity policy, that not a word about balanced budgets anymore. And he said he was going to run at policy to employ American labor and put it back to work on infrastructure. Again, he’s made a left runaround Hillary. He says he wants to reinstate Glass-Steagall, whereas the Clintons were the people that got rid of it.
And this may be for show, simply to brand Hillary as Wall Street’s candidate. But it also seems to actually be an attack on Wall Street. And Trump’s genius was to turn around all the attacks on him as being a shady businessman. He said, look, nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it. Now, what that means, basically, as a businessman, he knows the fine print by which they’ve been screwing the people. So only someone like him knows how to fight against Wall Street. After all, he’s been screwing the Wall Street banks for years [inaud.]. And he can now fight for the population fighting against Wall Street, just as he’s been able to stiff the banks.
So it’s sort of hilarious. On the one hand, leading up to him you had Republicans saying throw Hillary in jail. And Hillary saying throw Trump in the [inaud.]. And so you have the whole election coming up with—……


Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Wall Street on edge as Republicans warm to Glass-Steagall

Wall Street on edge as Republicans warm to Glass-Steagall

…Presidential candidates do not have to follow party platforms, but big banks will be troubled by the cross-party support for legislation inspired by the 1933 Glass-Steagall act because such ideas can gain a life of their own once in official documents.

Any prohibition barring investment bankers from operating under the same roof as federally insured deposits would pose an existential challenge to Citigroup, JPMorgan, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and, to a lesser extent, Goldman Sachs.

The original Glass-Steagall act was abolished in 1999 when President Bill Clinton signed bank reform legislation that was crafted by Republican lawmakers and backed by many Democrats in Congress….

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

CRISIS AVERTED? IMF predicts Britain’s economy will grow faster than both Germany and France despite Brexit shock

CRISIS AVERTED? IMF predicts Britain’s economy will grow faster than both Germany and France despite Brexit shock

IMF chiefs today slashed Britain’s growth forecasts – but admitted the UK economy will still outperform Germany and France next year.

And just weeks after sparking outrage with an apocalyptic warning about Brexit, the IMF claimed Britain was now set to avoid a devastating recession…..

Kui meie liitumisest EL-ga räägiti, siis argumendid olid majanduslikud, see pidavat kasulik olema meile majanduslikult, tegemist olla ju majandusliiduga. Nüüd enam EL-i poolt majanduslike argumentidega ei vehelda üldiselt, sest need pole tõsiseltvõetavad. Keegi ei söenda väita, et näiteks Itaalia majandusel oleks veel kehvemini läinud, kui ta poleks liitunud EL-ga ja euroga. Majanduslikult on see liit läbi kukkunud. Võib olla on raske tunnistada seda soovmõtlejatel, aga see on kasinuse ja tööpuuduse, massilise rahvarände neoliberaalne liit.

Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

ECB can’t run out of money

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Philip Pilkington: The Irish Begin to Wake Up to the Fact That They are Repaying Money That is Then Burned

Philip Pilkington: The Irish Begin to Wake Up to the Fact That They are Repaying Money That is Then Burned

About a year ago a couple of friends and I were sitting around drinking beer and talking. As so often happens today in day-to-day Irish conversation, the economic situation and the repayment of debts was raised. One of my friends said that, naturally, the debts had to be repaid. I pointed out to him that by repaying the debt we were just sending away money to be effectively destroyed.

He couldn’t believe what I was saying and I didn’t blame him because it sounded like madness. But I pointed out to him that the money the Irish people were repaying by accepting decreases in government spending and increases in taxes was simply going to the central bank and from there it was being destroyed. I explained that what had happened was that the central bank had created a load of new money and thrown it into the crumbling Irish banking sector. Now the Irish people were paying back this newly created money so that it could be destroyed by the central bank.

My friend thought about it for a while and then pointed out that if the new money wasn’t paid back and destroyed it would result in inflation. Not so, I said, because the money has already entered the economy. The Irish banks loaned out the money during the boom years and this had driven a speculative bubble in the property market. But now we were just trying to prop up the banks that had made these loans. Effectively we were taking newly created money, throwing it into a black hole in the banking system and then scalping tax payers and citizens so that we could pay back money that would be destroyed by the central bank.

He refused to believe me. The story was too incredible. After all, why on earth would the central bank want the money back if they were just going to destroy it? Why would they want to destroy it if it would not lead to inflation? Politics, I said. He shook his head and took another sip of beer…….

…..The questions is for how long will the Irish people continue to be intimidated into handing money over to be burned while the country itself goes up in flames? How long can this farce, propagated largely by the Eurocrats, be maintained until someone raises the question of why exactly the Irish people continue to ruin their economy through austerity measures in order to repay what is effectively a phantom balance sheet?

Rahandus kõlab inimesele, kes pole selle üle mõelnud, täiesti uskumatuna ning MMT-d ja selle jutustajaid peetakse seetõttu tihti soolapuhujateks. “Ei või olla, et ajakirjandus jama ajab, et rahandusministrid jama ajavad”.

Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

What the Trident Debate taught us about government spending

by Neil Wilson

What the Trident Debate taught us about government spending

That is what is so revealing about debates over military spending. When the chips are down the numbers become irrelevant. Not one government minister anywhere has ever said that they can’t bomb Baghdad, Bazra or the Balkans because they don’t have the budget.

Of course that is because the numbers are indeed largely irrelevant for all government spending. In fact the numbers have become a mechanism in debates to avoid talking about the substance of government intervention in the economy — what the government proposes to use resources for, where it is going to get those resources from, and what the alternative uses are for those resources……

Või oled sa kuulnud mõnda poliitikut väitvat, et Bagdadi ei saa pommitada, sest sellest tuleks inflatsioon? Aga väited on just sellist laadi, kui jutt on sotsiaaltoetustest, tööhõivest vms.

Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

Üks mõtlemapanev kommentaar internetist

Here’s an interesting something that I’ve been talking about with people recently: maybe the cultural left is actually PART OF neoliberalism.

I started thinking this after the Brexit debate. I hang around in London finance circles and what struck me was that the exact same rhetoric that was being used by the cultural left types on my Facebook feed was being used by the finance people. It was 100% identical. Right from the anti-democratic tone to the complaints about racism and all that.

I think that both of these groups are actually the same people. They’re sort of embodied in that person who you actually see an awful lot: the Guardian reader who voted Thatcher/Major/Blair/Cameron. There are literally tons of these people.

They care about the ‘environment’. They want open borders and free trade (although they’ll buy fair trade coffee to boost their egos). They strongly dislike high taxes – especially when they are at the stage in their careers (aged 35+) when those higher tax rates impact them. They dislike poor people and think that anyone who works for a living is a racist. But they generally support welfare handouts much in the same way as Victorian snobs supported soup kitchens; so long as the poor stay poor and exercise no social control they make nice pets.

Maybe this is the key. Maybe we’re wrong to think about the ‘contradiction’ between cultural leftism and leftism. Maybe cultural leftism is actually the IDEOLOGY OF NEOLIBERALISM.

There actually seems to be some limited recognition of this, although I don’t think it goes far enough.

Posted in English, Estonian | 1 kommentaar

Brexit signals that a new policy paradigm is required including re-nationalisation

Brexit signals that a new policy paradigm is required including re-nationalisation

With the new British Prime Minister now indicating that she will push ahead with Brexit and free the nation from the undemocratic imposts of the increasingly dysfunctional European Union, a view that is apparently ‘poisonous’ to some so-called progressive writers, several pro-Remain economists or economic commentators have realised that the game is up for neo-liberalism in Britain. There have been several articles recently arguing (after bitching about the loss of the Remain vote and repeating the catastrophe mantra) that a new economic paradigm is now called for in Britain, based on its new found sovereignty (after it finally exits). It could, by the way, exit through an Act of Parliament without all the Article 50 palaver if it wanted to. That is just a smokescreen. This idea of a new paradigm being required is exactly what Thomas Fazi and I are working on as part of our current book project which is nearing completion. Today, I consider briefly our view that nationalisation has to return as a key industry policy plank for any aspiring progressive political party…..

Kui rääkida veel paljunämmutatud Brexitist, siis UK oli selles suhtes unikaalne, et nad on alati euroskeptilised olnud, aga sarnasus on teiste liikmesriikidega minu meelest täiesti olemas. Liberaalid ja enda arvates progressiivsed pidasid Brexiti toetajaid lollideks, harimatuteks, tagurlikeks jne. Ka meie ühiskonnas on palju neid, kes pole EL-ga liitumisest just palju võitnud. Paljud on pidanud oma kodud isegi maha jätma ja võib olla seetõttu isegi pooldavad EL-i, sest arvavad, et muidu poleks neil seda võimalust olnud, seejuures aru saamata, et neoliberaalne poliitika tegigi nende elu kodumaal võimatuks. Üht- või teistpidi tundub mulle, et selline lõhe inimeste vahel EL-s süveneb ja pikka pidu ma küll ei ennustaks niisugusele liidule. Euroopa tasemel ei ole mitte midagi tehtud, et seda peatada. Jutud pangandusliidustki on vaid kõlavad loosungid.

Posted in Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

Kristjani plaan Euroopale (EL-i päästmise plaan õelalt euroskeptikult)

Euroopas peaks olema  valitsuse tööprogramm, mis pakub tööd kõigile soovijatele, kes tasulist tööd otsivad.  Viimast finantseeritakse Euroopast, kuid administreeritakse liikmesriikide ja ka kohalike omavalitsuste poolt. Selles programmis osalejatele makstakse palka, millega saab ära elada rikkamates riikides, kus hinnatase on kõrgem. See viib hinnatõusuni vaesemates riikides, mida võib nimetada ka ajutiseks inflatsiooniks nendes riikides. Ühtlasi aitab see kaasa palgatasemete ühtlustumisele liikmesriikides. Samas hoiab ära euroopasisesed majanduspõgenikud (poola torumehed UK-s). Selles programmis makstav tasu oleks ka põrand, millest madalamalt makstes poleks võimalik erasektoril inimesi tööle saada.

Kas see päästaks EL-i lagunemast? Ma ei tea seda, aga minu meelest mitte midagi vähemat seda ka ei teeks. Praeguses olukorras ei ole kindlasti konstruktiivne konkursse välja kuulutada esirassistide leidmiseks vms. Nendel inimestel, kes toetavad EL-i ja siunavad pahasid euroskeptikuid, on aeg peeglisse vaadata ja endalt küsida, et kui väga nad tahaksid EL edasikestmist näha. Kas siis enam ei taha, kui massilist tööpuudust ja majandusstagnatsiooni pole? Või struktuurseid reforme laristajatest kreeklastele? Minu meelest on see antud hetkel tähtsam ja pakilisem, kui EL-i demokratiseerimine, EL-i aluslepete muutmine jne(ma arvan, et selleks pole praegu lihtsalt aega). Kui liikmesriikide valitsused otsustaksid midagi sellist üheskoos ja Komisjonile survet avaldaksid, siis saab see finantseeritud. Küsimused, et kuidas on liikmesriikides tööjõu tootlikkusega (näiteks Eestis või Kreekas pole see nii kõrge kui Saksamaal), näitavad, et selleks pole piisavalt poliitilist tahet või ei saa küsijad aru olukorra tõsidusest. See oleks nn New Deal in Europe, mis suudaks luua miljoneid töökohti Euroopas.

Kui Euroopas osatakse leida raha pankade päästmiseks, siis kindlasti suudetakse leida raha ka niisuguse plaani jaoks (olgu või ajutiselt ja nimetatagu seda super emergency või mida iganes). Küsimus on ainult poliitilises tahtes. Kui midagi ligilähedast lauale ei panda, siis EL-l tulevikku pole. Siis need lollid ja halvad, kes on rongist maha jäänud, korraldavad uusi Brexiteid.

Sinu mõtted, täiendused, kriitika?

Posted in Estonian | 2 kommentaari

Sanders to Endorse Clinton, Betraying Loyal Supporters

…Sanders is no McKinney. His so-called transformational revolution was phony, lofty rhetorical mumbo jumbo without substance, old wine in new bottles, weasel-worded populism for the gallery, not reality – at the same time supporting imperial madness, endless wars, not a word on the stump denouncing them.
Backing an unfit to serve widely reviled hawkish neocon – irreparably tainted, a walking conflict of interest, untrustworthy, scandal-ridden, war criminal/racketeer puts Sanders in bed with the most dangerous presidential aspirant in US history.
Clinton allegedly throwing throwing him a bone or two in return for his endorsement, a prominent convention speaking slot, and perhaps a high-level position in her administration if elected ignores what virtually all candidates do in office.
Promises made are consistently broken, fading in the mist of day, borrowing a line from famed lyricist Oscar Hammerstein.
Sanders represents what’s wrong with America’s debauched political system – promising everything, delivering nothing!…
Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

It’s not about telling them

by Neil Wilson

It’s not about telling them

It’s not about telling them. It’s about persuading them that you have a better vision for their lives. and that the lies coming from the neo-liberal establishment are there to crush their lives. That’s what “take back control” means. A genuinely New Deal from an independent UK government.

I can guarantee everybody a job with a decent living income, a house to live in in their community and a pension to look forward to — all within a society that prioritise education and healthcare for local residents whatever business thinks. Because I understand what power government has within its own currency area to command the resources within it.

And yes the New Labour approach is the reason Labour has been losing support hand over fist for 15 years and has lost the last two general elections — because at the same time the Tories have roared back from their 1997 nadir. That approach no longer works. It was a one off opportunity and its over.

How many more elections have to be lost before Labour realise that the game has changed?

You can’t create the biggest private debt bubble in the world again. That has already been done and failed disastrously. You can’t rely on the financial sector ‘self-regulating’. The banks have to be proscribed to a short list of useful services and kept on a short leash. You can’t listen to mainstream neo-classical economists who suggest all you need to do is a bit of redistribution while keeping largely out of the way. Those that have lost out to the international globalisation fetish are demanding restitution. It isn’t enough to stand to one side any more.

So are we going to tell people that government has had enough of kow-towing to business and finance interests and that it will put people first ahead of business? Are we going to tell business that they are there to serve the people, not the other way around — and that by doing that business will actually make more far more money than they are doing now? Are we going to tell those in the North that the focus on London will end and that government will ensure income circulation in the Regions and in particular to the devolved areas? Are we going to end the ‘British Model’ of importing growth through immigration and concentrate instead on investment in automation, research and driving productivity — providing the private sector with new innovations from a resolutely public university sector?

A better management of neo-liberal corporatism isn’t a vote winner any more. People voted out so they can get something that is outside the remit of the EU treaty — jobs and a life to look forward to in a community they enjoy living in.

Time to put forward a New Deal. Our voters demand it.

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Itaalia ja eurosüsteem

Itaalia panganduskriis kogub tuure. Itaalia valitsuse abi pankadele tähendab valitsuse võlakoorma kasvu. Erinevalt näiteks USA-st on see võlakoorem “reaalne”, sest Itaalia valitsus laenab de facto võõrvaluutas. Iirimaa valitsus sai niiviisi võlakoorma kaela endale ja oli sunnitud kasinusmeetmeid rakendama peale seda, (väidetavalt olevat Trichet ähvardanud Iirimaa valitsust, et too pankasid päästma asuks). Sama juhtus natuke teistsugusel kujul ka Lätis. Vabad turumajandajad rääkisid siis üle enda võimete elamisest, kui tegelikult oli Läti võlakoorem olematu enne, kui ta oli sunnitud pangandust päästma ja pidi selleks IMF-lt laenama. Kasinusele järgnes massiline väljaränne riigist.

Itaalia pankade probleemid ei kao iseenesest. Ma ei tea, mida nad ette võtavad, aga üht või teistpidi saab likviidsus tulla ainult Euroopa Keskpangast. Praegu paistavad nad uskuvat ideesse, et turud distsiplineerivad. Valitsuse võlakriisi ajal oli samuti, kuni Mario Draghi tuli oma “whatever it takes” loosungiga välja. EKP võib näiteks pakkuda üleeuroopalist deposiitide kindlustust, valitsustel lubatakse sekkuda ilma, et võlaarvestuses kajastatakse seda, mingis osas mõeldakse välja ühised eurobondid vms. Kuni seda pole, on terve eurosüsteem ohustatud. Kui eelnevast järeldusi teha, siis nad lasevad pangajooksul juhtuda Itaalias ja võimatu pole isegi kogu pangandussüsteemi sulgemine, kapitalikontrollid jne. Loodame, et siiski mitte. Majandus aeglustub, mis tähendab, et pankade laenupositsioonid halvenevad tõenäoliselt veelgi. Ka Saksamaa pangad pole enam turvatsoon.

Kui vaadata olukorda Itaalia poolt, siis peaministril on väga vähe võimalusi. Selline pankade päästmine nagu omal ajal Rootsis, ei ole võimalik. Mida iganes Brüssel või EKP ütleb, seda peab tegema. Kui vastu hakkad, siis tõmmatakse likviidsuispistik seinast välja, riigi majandus lakkab toimimast ning sina ja sinu partei on ajaloo prügikastis, sest te keerasite majanduse tuksi. Sellest saavad kõik niimoodi aru ja niimoodi kajastab seda ka meedia. Ma tean eurofiilseid inimesi, kes praeguseni räägivad, et Syriza pani pangad kinni Kreekas ja põhjustas sellega palju häda ja viletsust. Nad ei tea, kuidas pangandus töötab ning kuna EKP otsustas laenamise Kreeka kommertspankadele lõpetada, siis seda pidigi tegema nende arvates, sest Kreekale oli niigi palju laenatud juba:)

Muidugi on selle asjaga mitmeid momente. Esiteks ei ole tegemist mitte mingisuguse neoliberaalse vandenõuga, nad ise ka usuvad nendesse ideedesse, mida nad propageerivad. Nad ei oleks muidu loonud nii mittefunktsionaalset rahaliitu. Nad ise tõsimeeli uskusid, et valitsuste võlgade rahastamine EKP poolt toob kontrollimatu inflatsiooni. Seda nad nüüd enam ei räägi peale EKP massiivset “rahatrükki”, kuigi on isegi neid, kes seda ikka veel ootavad.

Kui sa mäletad Ansipi ja Ligi jutte seoses eurobondidega, siis nemad olid nende vastu, sest uskusid, et turud määravad intressi neile bondidele ja kui me oleme ühte patta pandud laristajatega nagu Kreeka, siis maksame kõrgemat intressi. Selline loogika peaks siis hoidma ka New Yorki ja New Mexico osariigi kohta (föderaalne võlg)? Muidugi ei ole see tõsi. Nad tõesti uskusid ja paljud usuvad siiamaani, et meil on mingisugune vaba turumajandus, mitte poliitiliselt kontrolllitud rahamonopol.

Kui sa oled EKP ideoloogiat jälginud, siis sa tead, et EKP arvates on pankade kohustuste pool turudistsipliini koht. Selline idee ohustab euro maksesüsteemi. Enne see oht ei kao, kui EKP loobub sellest ideest. Täpselt nagu ta loobus sisuliselt sellest ideest, et turud rahastavad valitsuste võlgasid euroalal ja lubas sekkuda. Mingil kujul peaks sekkumine tulema pankade tegemistesse. Seda ei saa teha liikmesriigid nii, et nad EKP-st mööda lähevad.

Posted in Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

Goldman Sachs hires former EU chief José Manuel Barroso

by Financial Times

Goldman Sachs hires former EU chief José Manuel Barroso

Goldman Sachs has hired the former head of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso to help it through the fallout from the UK’s shock decision to quit the EU.

goldman barroso












Barroso räägib Goldman Sachs’i kõrgest eetikast  :)

Goldman Sachs Admits It Defrauded Investors, Receives $5 Billion Fine — But Will Pay Much Less Than That

Poliitiline eliit suhtub rahvasse kui idiootidesse.


Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

SG’s Edwards: is a symptom, not the cause of our problems and is next!

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Ignore the prophets of doom. Brexit will be good for Britain

Ignore the prophets of doom. Brexit will be good for Britain


Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

MMT-st ja tööhõivest

Tavaliselt on jutud MMT-st täis rõkkeid, et me ütlesime nii ja meil oli õigus ning jutt kipub olema tehnokraatlik. Keskpangad ei põhjusta inflatsiooni ega hoia seda ka ära, raha kogus on endogeenne jne.

Ma mõtlesin, et kirjutan natuke mittetehnokraatlikult MMT-lase mõttemaailmast.  Miks MMT-lane vasakpoolsete majandusteadlastega nagu Krugman, Piketty jne kohe üldse nõus ei ole.

Selleks peaks alustama vist kõige elementaarsemast. Rahandussüsteem on riiklik monopol, mis teenib avalikku huvi, eelkõige või peaasjalikult teenib see valitsust. Algab lugu nii, et valitsus kehtestab maksud, mille maksmist aktsepteerib ainult enda poolt väljastatavas valuutas. Maksudel on kahtlemata mitmeid funktsioone, aga MMT vaatekohast on mõned neist eriti olulised. MMT arvates ei aktsepteeriks keegi muidu täiesti väärtusetut valuutat, kui maksukohustust poleks majandusagentidel. (Paul Davidson on sellele vastu vaielnud mõneti ja tema arvates, aga ka paljude postkeinsistide arvates, on aktsepteeritavuse garandiks legal tender laws, st et valitsuse valuuta on kuulutatud ametlikuks maksevahendiks). MMT nägemuses on maksude üks funktsioone tööpuuduse tekitamine. Tööpuudus tekib ühiskonnas alles siis, kui valitsus on maksud kehtestanud ja inimesed püüavad end tööle pakkuda, et seda raha teenida, millega maksukohustusi kustutada saab. Tööpuudus on monetaarne nähtus MMT arvates. Vahest lähevad MMT-lased isegi nii kaugele, et väidavad, et mingit tööpuudust pole, tohutult on tööd teha ja ma võin isiklikult teile kõigile tööd pakkuda, aga ma ei maksa teile raha tehtud töö eest ning ütlevad siis, et tööpuudus on monetaarne nähtus: pole piisavalt rahaliselt tasustatud tööd.

Mis selle struktuurilise tööpuudusega on? Et näiteks meil ei ole piisavalt selliste oskustega töötajaid, et täita vakantseid töökohti? Paljud majanduskommentaatorid väidavad umbes nii, et kuulge, lõpetage ära see tööpuuduse jutt, meil ei ole piisavalt oskustega inimesi, et praegusi töökohti täita. Sellest võiks järeldada, et tööpuudus on strukturaalne nähtus ja ei tulene sellest, et valitsus pole piisavalt enda poolt väljastatud valuutat majandusse kulutanud? MMT niisugust juttu ei aktsepteeri ja ütleb, et inimestele tuleb kohe tööd anda, kui nende oskused ei vasta meie vajadustele, siis tuleb neid treenida, nad ümber õpetada vms.

David Graeber väitis oma raamatus(Debt the First 5000 Years) nii, et valitseja kehtestas maksud ja hakkas raha väljastama, et oma sõjaväge toita. Minu meelest võiks asja ette kujutada nii, et valitseja oleks võinud F-16 piloote otsida ning tõdenud, et neid ei ole, aga ikkagi maksukohustuse jätnud elanikkonnale. Oleks võinud rääkida, et keisririigis oli struktuurne tööpuudus, sest inimesi polnud, kes osanuks moodsaid jette piloteerida.

Seega MMT arvates on valitsus süüdi selles, et riigis on tööpuudus. Paradigma on hoopis erinev peavoolu omast. Kui me oleme harjunud sellega, et süüdistatakse töötuid liigses laiskuses või rumaluses, oskuste puudumises, siis MMT kehtestaks riikliku tööprogrammi, kus kõik soovijad saaksid töötada sellise palga eest, millega on võimalik selles riigis ära elada. See riiklik tööprogramm on keskvalitsuse poolt finantseeritud, aga võib olla administreeritud kohalike omavalitsuste poolt või isegi erafirmade poolt.  Ma seekord ei hakka tehnokraatlikult sellest programmist kirjutama, et see on inflatsioonivastane meede ja kuidas see hinnastabiilsuse tagab.

Kui ma esmakordselt kokku puutusin MMT-ga, siis ma mõtlesin omaette, et kuna täistööhõive on püha graal iga majandusteadlase jaoks, siis tuleb see idee vaid ära seletada neile ja tulevik on praegusest erinev. Muidugi ma eksisin.

Võib olla annab mingisuguse idee Krugmani ja MMT mõttemaailma erinevustest see lõik Krugmani jutus:

 Don’t take simple things for granted: It is crucial, when trying to communicate Ricardo’s idea to a broader audience, to stop and try to put yourself in the position of someone who does not know economics. Arguments must be built from the ground up — don’t assume that people understand why it is reasonable to assume constant employment, or a self-correcting trade balance, or even that similar workers tend to be paid similar wages in different industries.

Krugman kutsub üles majandusinimesi ajupesu tegema “vähem targematele”. “Ära arva, et inimesed saavad aru, miks on konstantse tööhõive eeldus mõistlik, kui sa räägid neile vaba kaubavahetuse võludest.” Tihti muidugi peavoolu teoreetikud räägivad, et nad ei tee täistööhõive eeldusi majanduses, aga Krugman väidab siin, et täiesti mõistlik on konstantse tööhõive eeldus teha, kui Ricardo ideesid seletada. Et mine seleta seda kreeklastele või hispaanlastele:) Ja kaubavahetus tasakaalustab end ise, aga ära arva, et inimesed sellest aru saavad. Muidugi inimesed pole sellega nõus, kui nad reaalses maailmas toimuvat näevad. Kui keegi tahab peale selle lugemist väita, et Krugman pole neoliberaal, sest õigustab valitsuse defitsiite ning et mina olen vaid õel tema vastu, siis andke andeks, aga te ajate jama. Ei ole juhuslik, et Krugman toetas Clintonit ja mitte Sandersit. Ma ei hakka praegu Piketty raamatust lõike otsima, aga ka Piketty on sama masti mees.

Mis puudutab EL-i, siis MMT-l pole seisukohta. Paljud MMT-lased toetavad EL-i ideed. Näiteks Randall Wray ütles, et inimesed Euroopas peavad otsustama selle tuleviku, kuid tema arvates olevat see hea idee. Bill Mitchell on viimasel ajal tugevasti EL-i vastu pööranud. Muidugi seda, et euro on valesti loodud valuuta, on MMT alati väitnud. Mina isiklikult arvan, et EL on globaalse neoliberalismi leviku üks olulisi verstaposte ning mida kiiremini see laguneb, seda parem.

Posted in Estonian | 1 kommentaar

The Italian Job

5-Star surge and banking woes deter Italy’s bond investors

Italy led a move higher in southern European bond yields on Thursday as the rising popularity of the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement and concerns about a banking sector saddled with bad debts rattled investors.

Polls showed this week that the 5-Star Movement (M5S) — which has called for a referendum on euro zone membership and triumphed in local elections last month — is now Italy’s most popular party, ahead of Prime Minister Matteo Renzi’s Democrats.

While Italy’s next national election is not until 2018, the polls make grim reading for Renzi who is struggling to deal with growing friction inside his coalition and faces a do-or-die referendum in October on constitutional reform, having promised to resign if he loses. M5S and all other opposition parties are campaigning against the reform…..

Mis puudutab Reutersi pealkirja võlakirjainvestorite eemalepeletamisest, siis see ei ole üldse see mure, mida muretsema peaks. Mitte, et intresside lakkelendamine võimatu oleks valitsuse võlakirjadelt, kui nad tahavad Itaalialt midagi välja pressida näiteks või ka puhtast rumalusest lihtsalt, aga eriti ei usu seda. Nad pigem teevad kõik poliitiliselt, et rahu valitseks Itaalia valitsuse võlakirjade osas. Hoopis teine lugu on Itaalia pankadega. Itaalia pankadel on suur kogus halbu laene, sel pole mingit pistmist Brexitiga. Uute reeglite järgi tuleb bail-in-i kasutada, see tähendab, et võlakirjahoidjad peavad kaotama, muidu ei lubata valitsusel pankasid päästa. Itaalias on palju jaeinvestoreid (need reeglid on disainitud institutsionaalseid investoreid silmas pidades, kes idee järgi peaksid teadma, millega nad riskivad), kes kaotaksid ja Renzile oleks see poliitiliselt hävitav. Beppe Grillo partei on kõige populaarsem küsitluste järgi praegu ja Grillo tahab referendumit korraldada euro hülgamiseks. Oktoobris toimuval referendumil per se pole euro ja EL-ga otsest pistmist, küll aga kaudselt. Nimelt tehakse Renzi hakklihaks, kui ta ei suuda nondele konstitutsioonilistele muutustele jahi saada referendumil.  Näis mida Euroopa teeb nüüd (loe Merkel, meie ei otsusta midagi). Ühtpidi on kaua räägitud, et reegleid tuleb täita, teistpidi annab jäikus Itaalia suunal Grillole trumbid kätte ja Grillo risti ette ei löö euro osas. Muidugi valimisi ei toimu Itaalias enne 2018 aastat. Erakorralised valimised saavad ikka toimuda, kui poliitika kollapsib.

Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

Tiit Riismaa, huh

Tiit Riismaa: kas demokraatia päevad on loetud?

Brexit on õpikunäide mudelist, kus demokraatlikku süsteemi õnnestub kahjustada demokraatia enda abil, kirjutab matemaatikadoktor Tiit Riismaa.

See Tiit Riismaa artikkel näitab minu meelest, et me oleme hakanud lähenema totalitarismile. Suurbritannias on demokraatia ja see ei saanud kahjustatud Brexiti poolt. Midagi sellist saaks väita, kui britid oleksid valinud totalitarismi. Pigem on EL-i poolt hääletamine “demokraatliku süsteemi” kahjustamine, sellega on enam vähem kõik nõus täna, et EL-s on demokraatia defitsiit.

Aga kui Tiit Riismaa apelleerib sellele, et EL-st väljumine on kahjulik Suurbritanniale, siis ta vist väidab, et rahvas on loll ja temal on absoluutne tõde. See iseenenest on demokraatia vastane ja pigem pooldab ideeliselt totalitarismi.

Demokraatia ei tähenda seda, et võimutsevad need ideed, mis sulle meeldivad, kuitahes õigeteks sa neid ka ei pea. Kui sa arvad, et Brexit on kahjulik UK-le, siis sorry, aga see on vaid sinu arvamus.

Tiit Riismaa tegelik sõnum: demokraatia jääb meie üllatele ideedele jalgu.  Nii arvavad täna paljud Euroopas, sellepärast on korduvalt ignoreeritud rahva tahet referendumitel. Sellepärast püütakse Prantsusmaal tööjõureformi läbi suruda parlamendist mööda minnes jne. Kui ainult seda lolli rahvast  ja demokraatiat poleks. Seoses Brexitiga on minu meelest välja tulnud, kui demokraatiavastane meie ühiskond tegelikult on. Ma mõtlen selle all lääne ühiskonda laiemalt, mitte ainult Eestit. Kui kõik läheks alati poliitilisele eliidile meelepäraselt valimistel, siis ei oleks ju vaja üldse neid valimisi.

Posted in Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

Reitinguagentuurid Austraalia kallal

Australia Rating Outlook Cut to Negative From Stable by S&P

Brian Romanchuk seletab, miks investorid suhtuvad sellesse kui meelelahutusse.

Another Example Why Bond Investors Ignore Developed Sovereign Credit Ratings


Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar


open access

Image | Posted on by | Lisa kommentaar

An Open Letter to the British Left

Hea artikkel Jacobinilt:

An Open Letter to the British Left

A Greek leftist on why British socialists shouldn’t shy away from rejecting the European Union

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

Put up or shut up

Brüssel asub Portugali ja Hispaaniat trahvima

Esimest korda ajaloos kavatseb euroliit hakata liikmesriike sanktsioneerima selle eest, et nad ei ole kinni pidanud ELi eelarvepoliitika kokkulepetest…..

Need, kes pooldavad EL-i ja euroga jätkamist, peaksid seletama, et kuidas see kasulik on näiteks Portugalile ja Hispaaniale. Kuidas need riigid saaksid ära kasutada oma majanduse täit potentsiaali? Tühjad loosungid, et Euroopat tuleb reformida ja Euroopa peab muutuma, ei ole kuigi konstruktiivsed.  Ma olen sellist tühja juttu teatud seltskonnalt pidanud juba aastaid kuulma: natsionalism ei ole lahendus jne.  Tõsiseltvõetavaid plaane neil pole. It is time to put up or shut up.

Posted in Estonian | Lisa kommentaar

MMT to the ECB- you can’t inflate, even if you wanted to(November 26, 2011)

by Warren Mosler

With the tools currently at their immediate disposal, including providing unlimited member bank liquidity,lowering the interbank rate, and buying euro national govt debt, the ECB has no chance of causing any monetary inflation, no matter how hard it might try. There just are no known channels, direct or indirect, in theory or practice, that connects those policies to the real economy. (Note that this is not to say that removing bank liquidity and national govt credit support wouldn’t be catastrophic. It’s a bit like engine oil. You need a gallon or two for the engine to run correctly, but further increasing the oil in the sump isn’t going to alter the engine’s performance.)

Lower rates sure doesn’t do the trick. Just look to Japan for going on two decades, the US going on 3 years, and the ECB’s low rate policies of recent years. There’s not a hint of monetary inflation/excess aggregate demand or inflationary currency weakness from low rates. If anything, seems to me the depressing effect on savers indicates low rates from the CB might even, ironically, promote deflation through the interest income channels, as the non govt sector is necessarily a net receiver of interest income when the govt is a net payer. (See Bernanke, Reinhart, and Sacks 2004 Fed paper on the fiscal effect of changes in interest rates.)

And if what’s called quantitative easing was inflationary, Japan would be hyperinflating by now, with the US not far behind. Nor is there any sign that the ECB’s buying of euro govt bonds has resulted in any kind of monetary inflation, as nothing but deflationary pressures continue to mount in that ongoing debt implosion. The reason there is no inflation from the ECB bond buying is because all it does is shift investor holdings from national govt debt to ECB balances, which changes nothing in the real economy.

Nor does bank liquidity provision have anything to do with monetary inflation, currency depreciation, or bank lending. As all monetary insiders know, bank lending is never reserve constrained. Constraints on banking come from regulation, including capital requirements and lending standards, and, of course credit worthy entities looking to borrow. With the ECB providing unlimited liquidity for the last several years, wouldn’t you think if there was going to be some kind of monetary problem it would have happened by now?

So the grand irony of the day is, that while there’s nothing the ECB can do to cause monetary inflation, even if it wanted to, the ECB, fearing inflation, holds back on the bond buying that would eliminate the national govt solvency risk but not halt the deflationary monetary forces currently in place.

So where does monetary inflation come from? Fiscal policy. The Weimar inflation was caused by deficit spending on the order of something like 50% of GDP to buy the foreign currencies demanded for war reparations. It was no surprise that selling that many German marks for foreign currencies in the market place drove the mark down as it did. In fact, when that policy finally ended, so did the inflation. And there was nothing the central bank could do with interest rates or buying and selling securities or anything else to stop the inflation caused by the massive deficit spending, just like today there is nothing the ECB can do to reverse the deflationary forces in place from the austerity measures.

So here we are, with the ECB demanding deflationary austerity from the member nations in return for the limited bond buying that has been sustaining some semblance of national govt solvency, not seeming to realize it can’t inflate with its monetary policy tools, even if it wanted to.

Post script:

The only way the ECB could inflate would be to buy dollars or other fx outright, which it doesn’t do even when it might want a weaker euro, as ideologically they want the euro to be the reserve currency, and not themselves build fx reserves that give the appearance of the euro being backed by fx.

Posted in English | Lisa kommentaar

French government invokes emergency power to pass labor reform

French government invokes emergency power to pass labor reform

“We have made choices, clear choices,” Prime Minister Manuel Valls said in the National Assembly as some Socialist Party legislators walked out in protest. He added that the emergency power in the constitution “allows us to advance. We’re acting in the interest of the French people.

Kas tõesti on nii, et parlamendis ei saa seda hääletusele panna, sest parlament ei käitu prantsuse inimeste huvide kohaselt? Manuel Valls tahab prantsuse inimeste huvide eest seista ja on seetõttu sunnitud parlamendist mööda minema?

Reports suggest the public is also against the final passage of the reform, as an opinion poll published last week found that 73 percent of the French would be “shocked” if the government resorted to the constitutional measure.

Selliseid heategijaid on tekkinud hästi palju, kes on meist lollidest palju targemad ja tahavad meile head teha. Alates Tsiprasest ja Syrizast, kuni lõpetades Prantsusmaa peaministriga. See asi on kestnud juba mõnda aega. Prantsusmaa rahvas hääletas referendumil maha Euroopa konstitutsiooni, aga sellest hoolimata kiitis parlament selle heaks mõned aastad hiljem, küll Lissaboni lepingu nime all(garanteeris sellega euroskeptikute elujõulisuse Prantsusmaal). Jälle oli tarvis lollile rahvale head teha. Paljud Euroopa Liidu toetajad on öelnud seoses Brexitiga, et referendumid on problemaatilised. ok, arusaadav, aga ka parlamendid muutuvad üha problemaatilistemaks.

Posted in English, Estonian | Lisa kommentaar