Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know what you imagine Keynesian economics to be but it is NOT spend more than 'you' take in and not accumulate a lot of debt.
Keynes believed that in severe recessions and depressions fiscal spending and loose monetary policy can be effective at dampening the recession or depression or reversing it. He also believed that high inflation boom times can be controlled by running fiscal surpluses and raising interest rates.
Keynes' theories have been well proven.
Oh, how many here know that the deficit is plummeting?
It is indeed. IMO too fast.
"Originally Posted by CIB View Post
Good Morning from Texas,
I want to know why severe deficite spending is good for our country. Can anyone explain that to me?"
Hitler. He forced everyone off the gold standard because he directly financed his war machine. Had we not done the same, ich würde sein posting auf Deutsch.
Reagan and Hitler were the finest students of soft money there ever was.
There are, however, even more direct indications that a first-class political issue is at stake here. In the great depression in the 1930s, big business consistently opposed experiments for increasing employment by government spending in all countries, except Nazi Germany.
Countries that limp along with some gold circulation are not put out of their misery. Once a state or region is drained of gold entirely they figure out money pretty quickly. Wiemar Germany had no gold. Soon as Germany defaulted and went to the Deutschmark they were a threat in just a few decades. After the war all debt was canceled because it was owed to the Nazis. So Germany took off again....
If Schumpeter is right about the entrepreneur when he says:
“the typical debtor in capitalist society”
Then I cannot possibly think of a worse way to run an economy which has been primarily designed to save creditors and the banks. He must agree with Rothbard who said healthy banks were no sign of a healthy economy.
We could have:
* Allowed bankruptcies( no bailouts of any kind)
* halted taxes and run large deficits to use soft money for keeping industry solvent.
Anything to shift purchasing power to industry and innovation. Instead we used soft money economics to secure the creditors, the worst of all possible actions.
Hitler. He forced everyone off the gold standard because he directly financed his war machine. Had we not done the same, ich würde sein posting auf Deutsch.
Reagan and Hitler were the finest students of soft money there ever was.
There are, however, even more direct indications that a first-class political issue is at stake here. In the great depression in the 1930s, big business consistently opposed experiments for increasing employment by government spending in all countries, except Nazi Germany.
Countries that limp along with some gold circulation are not put out of their misery. Once a state or region is drained of gold entirely they figure out money pretty quickly. Wiemar Germany had no gold. Soon as Germany defaulted and went to the Deutschmark they were a threat in just a few decades. After the war all debt was canceled because it was owed to the Nazis. So Germany took off again....
If Schumpeter is right about the entrepreneur when he says:
“the typical debtor in capitalist society”
Then I cannot possibly think of a worse way to run an economy which has been primarily designed to save creditors and the banks. He must agree with Rothbard who said healthy banks were no sign of a healthy economy.
We could have:
* Allowed bankruptcies( no bailouts of any kind)
* halted taxes and run large deficits to use soft money for keeping industry solvent.
Anything to shift purchasing power to industry and innovation. Instead we used soft money economics to secure the creditors, the worst of all possible actions.
I would inject that in our case as the fiat was created, the Federal Gov't and private industry willingly got together to do all the business and create all the products needed to prosecute the war. In Nazi Germany it was all by fiat.
I would inject that in our case as the fiat was created, the Federal Gov't and private industry willingly got together to do all the business and create all the products needed to prosecute the war. In Nazi Germany it was all by fiat.
A true workers paradise has always been during warfare and plaque ,where buying power mysteriously appears from nowhere.....
I don't get the question. How could the national debt be good?
Our cash money is in there. 1 USD = 1 dollar of National Debt
We control and leverage on much of the world's economy as the USD is the main reserve/savings/business transaction currency of the world. This is all National Debt. Most of the National Debt is either contained within our Gov't itself, or owed to our people/businesses.
PAUL JAY, SENIOR EDITOR, TRNN: Welcome to The Real News Network. I’m Paul Jay in Baltimore.
As the effects of the sequester agreement ripple through the American economy–massive cuts, that is, to social programs, and the military to some extent–one thing is clear: both sides–President Obama and the leadership of the Republican Party–seem to think that public debt is the biggest challenge facing the American economy. Well, our next guest begs to differ.
Now joining us in the studio is Michael Hudson. He was a Wall Street financial analyst, is now a distinguished research professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. His recent books are The Bubble and Beyond and Finance Capitalism and Its Discontents.
Public debt--money owed the government to itself (what it has borrowed from social security, etc) is nothing--the government electronically produces more money to pay itself. REAL debt, is created by supporting PRIVATE industry--to whom payment must be made.
At about the ten minute mark, Hudson points out how only two countries have the ability to print their own money--the U.S. and Zimbabwe. All the other nations which have limited how much money they can "print" are having great disruption in their economies--and people over there who have money are sending it over here precisely because we can print money. But he also points out in his video that both the Republicans and Democrats are responsible for heading us toward still another disaster because they keep supporting banks that used to liquify debts when they over lent. Instead, our political system is protecting them because the banking industry is a tremendous source of campaign money.
The problem, IMO, economically, for America, is to get lobbying money out of the government by publicly funding all campaigns and limiting the total amount of money that can be spent in a campaign---and dictating that private sources cannot be involved in campaigns. It runs counter to our "freedom" culture, but it is literally the sole way of protecting us from the billions spent by the industries of health care, banking, oil & gas, milk, & the defense industry.
Doing so should lower the cost of products as those industries could no longer write lobbying expenses off (although they might choose to distribute it to their managements).
Last edited by Wardendresden; 10-20-2013 at 11:28 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Commercial banks are our debt problem
