Tue 2010-10-12 16:01 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> Iceland ... another neo-liberal casuality

...For a real world example of the benefits of adopting a floating, sovereign, currency we can look to Argentina....At the time of the 2001 crisis, the government realised it had to adopt a domestically-oriented growth strategy. One of the first policy initiatives taken by newly elected President Kirchner was a massive job creation program that guaranteed employment for poor heads of households. Within four months, the Plan Jefes y Jefas de Hogar (Head of Households Plan) had created jobs for 2 million participants which was around 13 per cent of the labour force. This not only helped to quell social unrest by providing income to Argentina's poorest families, but it also put the economy on the road to recovery. Conservative estimates of the multiplier effect of the increased spending by Jefes workers are that it added a boost of more than 2.5 per cent of GDP. In addition, the program provided needed services and new public infrastructure that encouraged additional private sector spending. Without the flexibility provided by a sovereign, floating, currency, the government would not have been able to promise such a job guarantee. Argentina demonstrated something that the World's financial masters didn't want anyone to know about. That a country with huge foreign debt obligations can default successfully and enjoy renewed fortune based on domestic employment growth strategies and more inclusive welfare policies without an IMF austerity program being needed. And then as growth resumes, renewed FDI floods in...sovereign governments are not necessarily at the hostage of global financial markets. They can steer a strong recovery path based on domestically-orientated policies -- such as the introduction of a Job Guarantee -- which directly benefit the population by insulating the most disadvantaged workers from the devastation that recession brings...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Iceland; neo-liberal casuality.

New Economic Perspectives Sat 2010-07-24 16:30 EDT

Deficit Doves Meet the Deficit Owls

Paul Davidson, James K. Galbraith and Lord Robert Skidelsky

...We support the central objective of the letter -- a full employment policy now, based on sharply expanded public effort..apart from the effects of unemployment itself the United States does not in fact face a serious deficit problem over the next generation, and for this reason there is no "necessity [for] a program to cut the mid-and long-term deficit." On the contrary: If unemployment can be cured, the deficits we presently face will necessarily shrink. This is the universal experience of rapid economic growth: tax revenues rise, public welfare spending falls...The long-term deficit scare story plays into the hands of those who will argue, very soon, for cuts in Social Security as though these were necessary for economic reasons...We call on fellow economists to reconsider their casual willingness to concede to an unfounded hysteria over supposed long-term deficits, and to concentrate instead on solving the vast problems we presently face. It would be tragic if the Evans letter and similar efforts - whose basic purpose we strongly support - led to acquiescence in Social Security and Medicare cuts that impoverish America's elderly just a few years from now.

Deficit Doves Meet; Deficit Owls; New Economic Perspectives.

Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Post Keynesian Perspective Thu 2010-07-22 16:00 EDT

Fractional Reserve Banking: An Evil?

Lord Keynes

Hostility to fractional reserve banking is ubiquitous. The Austrians hate it and regard it as a type of fraud. There are even a good many people on the left who despise fractional reserve banking as an evil institution. However, a careful look at fractional reserve banking suggests that it is not necessarily a problem with modern fiat money, a well-regulated financial system, deposit insurance and a central bank ready as the lender of last resort. Fractional reserve banking without these safeguards can be extremely destabilizing and has often led to disastrous bank collapses and depressions...

21st century; evil; fractional reserve banking; Post Keynesian Perspective; social democracy.

Tue 2010-06-01 16:23 EDT

billy blog >> Blog Archive >> In the spirit of debate ...

Bill Mitchell

Readers of my blog often ask me about how modern monetary theory sits with the views of the debt-deflationists (and specifically my academic colleague Steve Keen). Steve and I have collaborated in the last few days to foster some debate between us on a constructive level with the aim of demonstrating that the common enemy is mainstream macroeconomics and that progressive thinkers should target that school of thought rather than looking within...hopefully, this initiative will broaden the debate and bring more people up to speed on where the real enemy of full employment lies...The modern monetary system is characterised by a floating exchange rate (so monetary policy is freed from the need to defend foreign exchange reserves) and the monopoly provision of fiat currency. The monopolist is the national government. Most countries now operate monetary systems that have these characteristics...the monetary unit defined by the government has no intrinsic worth...The viability of the fiat currency is ensured by the fact that it is the only unit which is acceptable for payment of taxes and other financial demands of the government.The analogy that mainstream macroeconomics draws between private household budgets and the national government budget is thus false. Households, the users of the currency, must finance their spending prior to the fact. However, government, as the issuer of the currency, must spend first (credit private bank accounts) before it can subsequently tax (debit private accounts)... Taxation acts to withdraw spending power from the private sector but does not provide any extra financial capacity for public spending...As a matter of national accounting, the federal government deficit (surplus) equals the non-government surplus (deficit). In aggregate, there can be no net savings of financial assets of the non-government sector without cumulative government deficit spending...contrary to mainstream economic rhetoric, the systematic pursuit of government budget surpluses is necessarily manifested as systematic declines in private sector savings...Unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low. As a matter of accounting, for aggregate output to be sold, total spending must equal total income (whether actual income generated in production is fully spent or not each period). Involuntary unemployment is idle labour unable to find a buyer at the current money wage. In the absence of government spending, unemployment arises when the private sector, in aggregate, desires to spend less of the monetary unit of account than it earns. Nominal (or real) wage cuts per se do not clear the labour market, unless they somehow eliminate the private sector desire to net save and increase spending. Thus, unemployment occurs when net government spending is too low to accommodate the need to pay taxes and the desire to net save...Unlike the mainstream rhetoric, insolvency is never an issue with deficits. The only danger with fiscal policy is inflation which would arise if the government pushed nominal spending growth above the real capacity of the economy to absorb it...government debt functions as interest rate support via the maintenance of desired reserve levels in the commercial banking system and not as a source of funds to finance government spending...there is no intrinsic reason for...

Billy Blog; blogs Archive; Debate; Spirit.

Wed 2009-12-16 12:30 EST

James Grant Mourns the Loss of the Gold Standard - WSJ.com

...There's no business value in financial safety when the government bails out the unsafe. And by bailing out a scandalously large number of unsafe institutions, the government necessarily puts the dollar at risk...Collateralize the dollar--make it exchangeable into something of genuine value. Get the Fed out of the price-fixing business. Replace Ben Bernanke with a latter-day Thomson Hankey. Find--cultivate--battalions of latter-day Hellmans and set them to running free-market banks. There's one more thing: Return to the statute books Section 19 of the 1792 Coinage Act...

com; gold standard; James Grant mourns; losses; WSJ.

naked capitalism Wed 2009-11-25 11:37 EST

Marc Faber: ``I don't think that you'll see gold below $1,000 per ounce probably ever''

Edward Harrison of Credit Writedowns

...cash is now trash with zero interest rates. So holding cash means underperforming. Bonds present an unfavourable risk/reward. Therefore, commodities and precious metals look attractive. One must also have equities exposure. Interestingly, he makes a fairly explicit statement in favour of peak oil from about 1:40 in the second video below. The world is adding less in oil reserves than it consumes. That necessarily means a tighter supply/demand dynamic, especially given the demand in emerging economies for oil.

000; 1; Marc Faber; naked capitalism; ounce probably; see gold; Think.

Thu 2009-09-17 10:08 EDT

The Next Financial Crisis

Peter Boone, Simon Johnson

Our banks have gotten into the habit of needing to be rescued through repeated bailouts. During this crisis, Bernanke--while saving the financial system in the short term--has done nothing to break this long-term pattern; worse, he exacerbated it. As a result, unless real reform happens soon, we face the prospect of another bubble-bust-bailout cycle that will be even more dangerous than the one we've just been through. ...We have seen this spectacle--the Fed saving us from one crisis only to instigate another--many times before. And, over the past few decades, the problem has become significantly more dire. The fault, to be sure, doesn't lie entirely with the Fed. Bernanke is a prisoner of a financial system with serious built-in flaws. The decisions he made during the recent crisis weren't necessarily the wrong decisions; indeed, they were, in many respects, the decisions he had to make. But these decisions, however necessary in the moment, are almost guaranteed to hurt our economy in the long run--which, in turn, means that more necessary but harmful measures will be needed in the future. It is a debilitating, vicious cycle. And at the center of this cycle is the Fed.

Financial Crisis.

Thu 2009-07-23 00:00 EDT

naked capitalism: Is Liquidity Really Good for You?

``just because a certain amount of liquidity is good, it does not necessarily follow that more is always better''; Richard Kline: ``The first issue when liquidity is provided to markets for any overall regulator, should and must be, "How do we prevent asset overpricing as a consequence? "''

Liquidity Really Good; naked capitalism.

Tue 2008-09-23 00:00 EDT

The Perilous Price of Oil - The New York Review of Books

The Perilous Price of Oil, by George Soros - The New York Review of Books; ``prices in financial markets do not necessarily tend toward equilibrium...There is a two-way, reflexive interplay between biased market perceptions and the fundamentals, and that interplay can carry markets far from equilibrium. Every sequence of boom and bust, or bubble, begins with some fundamental change, such as the spread of the Internet, and is followed by a misinterpretation of the new trend in prices that results from the change. Initially that misinterpretation reinforces both the trend and the misinterpretation itself; but eventually the gap between reality and the market's interpretation of reality becomes too wide to be sustainable.''

books; New York Review; Oil; Perilous Price.

Wed 2007-11-21 00:00 EST

Stabroek News

Financial Hypocrisy, by Joseph E. Stiglitz; "capital market liberalization brings instability, but not necessarily growth"; "while the current system may lead to unnecessary instability, and impose huge costs on developing countries, it serves some interests well"

Stabroek News.