Thanks, Stephanie, for such a clear explanation. It all seems so simple and logical. This country spends way too much time debating away things that will make this country a happier place to live.
I have to disagree with your take on Paul Ryan's expression. He had no clue what Alan Greenspan said, and was trying to cover that up to protect his "financial-adult-in-the-room" persona which was his stock in trade.
I tend to agree with you on that. I would not be surprised if Ryan expected Greenspan to play along with the charade given Greenspan's willingness to do so in the past ether.
I await your discussion of Sen. Sanders' Social Security Expansion Act with considerable trepidation.
The summary to which you link suggests that Sanders believes the Federal government must amass funds through taxation (here, payroll taxes on a higher share of income for high-paid salary earners) before it can spend (on Old Age Survivors). Clearly, from an MMT perspective we believe this to be incorrect. Tax the rich for greater social equality? Yes! But tax the rich to restore Social Security's "solvency"? That's letting Lindsay Graham and his ilk define the field of battle.
Excellent post on the accounting process for the creation of our money. Now that that is established why not deal terminatedly with the even less understaood and deeper problem of the monopolistic monetary paradigm of DEBT ONLY with a 50% Discount/Rebate policy at retail sale??? That would end inflation by implementing BENEFICIAL price and asset deflation while doubling everyone's purchasing power, and potentially doubling the available deman for every enterprise's goods and services. Opens up alot of additional politically integrative benefits as well. Let's stop believing in delusions about/not confronting the truths and realities possible in our sovereign fiat money system. Changing the monetary paradigm will make MMT's insights clear to all.
Thanks, Stephanie, for such a clear explanation. It all seems so simple and logical. This country spends way too much time debating away things that will make this country a happier place to live.
I have to disagree with your take on Paul Ryan's expression. He had no clue what Alan Greenspan said, and was trying to cover that up to protect his "financial-adult-in-the-room" persona which was his stock in trade.
I tend to agree with you on that. I would not be surprised if Ryan expected Greenspan to play along with the charade given Greenspan's willingness to do so in the past ether.
I await your discussion of Sen. Sanders' Social Security Expansion Act with considerable trepidation.
The summary to which you link suggests that Sanders believes the Federal government must amass funds through taxation (here, payroll taxes on a higher share of income for high-paid salary earners) before it can spend (on Old Age Survivors). Clearly, from an MMT perspective we believe this to be incorrect. Tax the rich for greater social equality? Yes! But tax the rich to restore Social Security's "solvency"? That's letting Lindsay Graham and his ilk define the field of battle.
Excellent post on the accounting process for the creation of our money. Now that that is established why not deal terminatedly with the even less understaood and deeper problem of the monopolistic monetary paradigm of DEBT ONLY with a 50% Discount/Rebate policy at retail sale??? That would end inflation by implementing BENEFICIAL price and asset deflation while doubling everyone's purchasing power, and potentially doubling the available deman for every enterprise's goods and services. Opens up alot of additional politically integrative benefits as well. Let's stop believing in delusions about/not confronting the truths and realities possible in our sovereign fiat money system. Changing the monetary paradigm will make MMT's insights clear to all.