This weekend, I’m reading an advance copy of Glory M. Liu’s forthcoming book, Adam Smith’s America: How a Scottish Philosopher Became an Icon of American Capitalism. The book will be released in November, and next month I’ll record an interview with Liu for the
Smith's work is indeed impressive except for one thing: There is no such thing and can be no such thing as free or free flowing markets...so long as we do not effectively deal with the current monopolistic paradigm of Debt Only as the sole form and vehicle for the creation and distribution of money. This economic factor underlies and under cuts every other theoretical consideration. Deal with it and we thrive and survive. Ignore it and, as history has shown us, empires eventually disintegrate. And with climate change thrown in even the possible end of civilization and species survival.
Deal with and change the monetary and economic pattern. It's the real problem.
I believe there is an intentional misuse of the term Liberal by Conservatives and unwittingly by most of the media and throughout society. It's Orwellian Doublespeak and Doublethink.
Most folks when they use the term liberal mean progressive or open-minded. But as y'all know in economics there are Bedrock Assumptions about Liberalism.
According to John Mearsheimer these Bedrock Assumptions are;
1. It is individualistic at its core. It assumes the individual takes precedence over the social group.
2. It assumes individuals cannot reach universal agreement over first principals. Those differences are sometimes profound and can lead to violence.
So the conservatives, media and others will say liberals meaning they are on the so-called left or progressive. Or they will say Pelosi liberals, the liberal media, so on & so forth.
This isn't what the U of Chic or conservatives really mean when they say liberal, they are referring to Mearsheimer's Liberal Bedrock Assumptions.
So there is confusion throughout society regarding the term liberal, which may be intentional or not. I believe it’s intentional and calculated.
Either way, I believe this is extremely pernicious and detrimental to a rational discussion of economics.
Ask anyone what’s more important, a few thousand people or the earth and the rest of humanity? Therefore, the community/social group does take precedence over the individual.
Regarding the bedrock assumption of not reaching universal agreement over first principals... whose first principals?
The only principal ‘liberals’ care about is their unlimited accumulation of wealth, assets, cashflow and income. AND there will be violence as the Big Money Interests will not willingly surrender their wealth, power, control and influence. We need to take it from them at the ballot box.
I believe that’s why the US has 800 military bases throughout the world with the remaining 100 or less foreign bases mostly comprised of our allies. That’s also why they have privatized all local, state and federal Treasuries, except the publicly owned Bank of North Dakota.
The Ruling Elite want to privatize everything they can that has cashflow like utilities, healthcare, insurance etc.
Currently, the bedrock basis of their wealth is gov’t spending/cashflow and all other natural monopolies that they own, or want to own, which all work together to undergird capitalism.
This review brings back memories of reading Adam Smith and the other founders of political economics as an undergraduate at MIT in the 1960's. It is great to see again the contributions of original thinkers in political economics.
"We read Smith’s iconic book, The Wealth of Nations, but we also read his Theory of Moral Sentiments."
That's quite ambitious for an undergraduate course. Back in the day at the New School, you would have read those in Robert Heilbroner's *second-year graduate* course!
Last I looked, Michael Hudson & Richard Wolff were on the PBI board or advisory board.
We need to get rid of compound interest which Michael clearly explains & preaches ie simple interest but there'd have be something added in for admin and loan losses. Example Medicare has 2% for admin, not 18% or so for private insurance companies. I don't think that 18 takes into account exorbitant salaries, stock options, company jets, cars, expense accounts etc.
Smith's work is indeed impressive except for one thing: There is no such thing and can be no such thing as free or free flowing markets...so long as we do not effectively deal with the current monopolistic paradigm of Debt Only as the sole form and vehicle for the creation and distribution of money. This economic factor underlies and under cuts every other theoretical consideration. Deal with it and we thrive and survive. Ignore it and, as history has shown us, empires eventually disintegrate. And with climate change thrown in even the possible end of civilization and species survival.
Deal with and change the monetary and economic pattern. It's the real problem.
Anyone that made it through all 950 pages of The Wealth of Nations and understood it, must be a genius! I couldn't do it.
The Misuse of the term Liberal
I believe there is an intentional misuse of the term Liberal by Conservatives and unwittingly by most of the media and throughout society. It's Orwellian Doublespeak and Doublethink.
Most folks when they use the term liberal mean progressive or open-minded. But as y'all know in economics there are Bedrock Assumptions about Liberalism.
According to John Mearsheimer these Bedrock Assumptions are;
1. It is individualistic at its core. It assumes the individual takes precedence over the social group.
2. It assumes individuals cannot reach universal agreement over first principals. Those differences are sometimes profound and can lead to violence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrE_RPNogG4&t=527s
Slide starts at 7mins 45secs
So the conservatives, media and others will say liberals meaning they are on the so-called left or progressive. Or they will say Pelosi liberals, the liberal media, so on & so forth.
This isn't what the U of Chic or conservatives really mean when they say liberal, they are referring to Mearsheimer's Liberal Bedrock Assumptions.
So there is confusion throughout society regarding the term liberal, which may be intentional or not. I believe it’s intentional and calculated.
Either way, I believe this is extremely pernicious and detrimental to a rational discussion of economics.
Ask anyone what’s more important, a few thousand people or the earth and the rest of humanity? Therefore, the community/social group does take precedence over the individual.
Regarding the bedrock assumption of not reaching universal agreement over first principals... whose first principals?
The only principal ‘liberals’ care about is their unlimited accumulation of wealth, assets, cashflow and income. AND there will be violence as the Big Money Interests will not willingly surrender their wealth, power, control and influence. We need to take it from them at the ballot box.
I believe that’s why the US has 800 military bases throughout the world with the remaining 100 or less foreign bases mostly comprised of our allies. That’s also why they have privatized all local, state and federal Treasuries, except the publicly owned Bank of North Dakota.
The Ruling Elite want to privatize everything they can that has cashflow like utilities, healthcare, insurance etc.
Currently, the bedrock basis of their wealth is gov’t spending/cashflow and all other natural monopolies that they own, or want to own, which all work together to undergird capitalism.
This review brings back memories of reading Adam Smith and the other founders of political economics as an undergraduate at MIT in the 1960's. It is great to see again the contributions of original thinkers in political economics.
Looks like a good book. I look forward to reading it
"We read Smith’s iconic book, The Wealth of Nations, but we also read his Theory of Moral Sentiments."
That's quite ambitious for an undergraduate course. Back in the day at the New School, you would have read those in Robert Heilbroner's *second-year graduate* course!
Last I looked, Michael Hudson & Richard Wolff were on the PBI board or advisory board.
We need to get rid of compound interest which Michael clearly explains & preaches ie simple interest but there'd have be something added in for admin and loan losses. Example Medicare has 2% for admin, not 18% or so for private insurance companies. I don't think that 18 takes into account exorbitant salaries, stock options, company jets, cars, expense accounts etc.