Open thread Nov.11, 2012 Dan Crawford | November 10, 2012 1:23 am Tags: open thread Comments (10) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
there’s a crowd sourced “MMT Fiscal Responsibility Narrative” over at New Economic Perspectives many here would be interested in…
it begins: The US Government can’t involuntarily run out of fiat money, since it has the constitutional authority to create it without limit…
ROI: Independent expenditure per Obama vote: $1.83 per Romney vote: $6.35.
An expensive loser, then.
Per Pro Publica here: http://projects.propublica.org/pactrack/candidates/votes
just something mentioned previously which aint got enough play…
i was surprised to learn that the Democrats won the House by around a half million votes, but most states congressional districts were heavily gerrymandered to favor the installation of a Republican majority
rjs I’m not convinced that gerrymandering added more than a few seats to the GOP side. Presumably someone will be addressing the question systematically because it’s really important on multiple levels. Regardless, Dem tactical adjustments would not suffice for 2014–Dem candidates lack a major issue that would attract GOP-leaning voters in non-urban congressional districts.
the government can’t run out of money. but if it can’t find a way to put people to work, it can run out of the goods and services without which the money is worthless.
@ PJR; im just relating what the numbers reveal, not passing judgement on what the outcome could have been otherwise…
coberly, the point is that the inability to put people to work is not based on budgetary constraints. but rather lack of political will…as i pointed out in another thread re Sandy, we have something on the order of 14% unemployment in the construction trades, and our capacity utilization is at 78%, but we arent fixing our infrastructure…the resources to do so are obviously available..
Not just available, but abundant. If you can’t fund infrastructure development and restoration at 10 year rates of under 2% something is seriously wrong with the cost/NPV evaluations.
I admit that presumes the evaluation takes place under rational rather than ideological terms. It’s a large presumption.
i agree with that. and it’s a better way to put it than saying we can just print the money.
coberly, it still does tie together with the MMT link; even that opening line i quoted seems outrageous…
the point is we are still making economic decisions as if our ability to do things was limited by available money, ie., as if we were still on the gold standard…
the problem is that too often we ask can we afford it, whereas the question we should be asking is can we do it…money is just a barbaric relic..