This is Julio's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Julio's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Julio
Recent Activity
Who's this "Umm No" you keep quoting? the Arab wife of Dr. No? I'm not disagreeing with you abou MMT'ers, I don't know enough; but the passage I quoted fails to make any case against them. Read what I said more carefully. If you still have some criticism of it, we can talk.
Toggle Commented yesterday on Links (9/13/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Bernstein is as usual right on the money, and he leads with the key distinction: are we at full employment or not? The previous quote is confused on the subject, e.g. "To wit, if constraints on the government's ability to "spend and spend" are truly understood and acknowledged by MMTers at large, then why does Mosler say that "government debt is not true debt" and that "There is no financial crisis so deep that a sufficiently large tax cut or spending increase cannot deal with it?"" The very definition of a financial "crisis" is one where resources are left idle. In that situation, a spending increase is not "reckless spend and spend" -- as Bernstein points out.
Toggle Commented 2 days ago on Links (9/13/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
In this area (warmongering foreign policy) I am in agreement with you about too many Democrats being in the war camp. That so many of them would criticize Trump for wanting to bring the troops home from Korea is revolting. Their criticism was echoed by a lot of the press. I'm hoping the Koreas will reach a peace treaty and make us irrelevant in the process. That would be a huge step forward for mankind.
Toggle Commented 3 days ago on Links (9/13/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Facebook should have stuck to their original mission of being a platform for communication. This was also their reason for not dealing with "fake news" at all, and in general not imposing censorship except for areas where there is broad social consensus (threats, pedophilia, pornography, and the like). Going beyond that is unacceptable for companies like Facebook that have an effective monopoly in a particular form of communication. Whether one agrees with their choice of censors or not, the censorship is really dangerous to free political communication. In addition, the monopoly means that their censorship also cuts people off from a major source of online income. It is as if, in the old days, every publication refused to run your ads.
Toggle Commented 5 days ago on Links (9/11/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
"We need a new language for talking about poverty. “Nobody who works should be poor,” we say. That’s not good enough. Nobody in America should be poor, period." Investigation of the UBI would at the very least highlight the right issues, and help create that language. Poverty being a relative measure, I'm not sure I would agree that "nobody should be poor". But nobody should be destitute, which is why we need a basic income sufficient to guarantee that much. The author unfortunately refers to UBI as a "post-work society", which is an absurdly superficial view calculated to close the discussion.
Toggle Commented 5 days ago on Links (9/11/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Yes, they do all suck, but unlike Republicans, Democrats occasionally pause. It's enough to make a significant difference.
Toggle Commented 5 days ago on Links (9/11/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Meanwhile, our "friends" abroad show how thanks to Trump and Pence, we are finally respected and our citizens are safe: https://theintercept.com/2018/09/11/egypt-crackdown-moustafa-kassem/
Toggle Commented 7 days ago on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
I'd call this tortured thinking, but that would only encourage the Boltons and Trumps.
Toggle Commented 7 days ago on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
So, an international court condemning US citizens for going to another country and killing people indiscriminately would be...a violation of national sovereignty?
Toggle Commented 7 days ago on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
You are focusing on the shrill use of "crisis" but the problem is the gradual disintegration of norms, while staying within the (wide) bands of the law. The DOJ can destroy people's lives while staying within the law, and without even the need for complicit judges and convictions. Just the investigations are enough, look at McCarthy. That's why the chants of "Lock her up!" are so vile, and why the effort to treat DOJ as a presidential fiefdom are so dangerous. And corruption at the top, even within the bounds of the law, is a far bigger problem for the working class than most of the economic issues we discuss here. Look at Brazil.
Toggle Commented Sep 10, 2018 on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
OK then Mr. Dershowitz, I stand corrected. From now on I will refer to Trump as a "conspirator".
Toggle Commented Sep 9, 2018 on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
This is tactically tone-deaf. Maybe ten years from now, if we're very lucky, her point will be fully valid. But right now, the bill clarifies that Amazon is as profitable as it is because of corporate welfare. So the fact that the government doesn't need to raise taxes to provide said welfare is not the point. At all.
Toggle Commented Sep 9, 2018 on Links (9/7/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
iputz was going for "quill being".
Toggle Commented Sep 6, 2018 on Links (9/5/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
...the United States "is not some banana republic." [Yep. Too cold.]
Toggle Commented Sep 4, 2018 on Links (9/3/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
I should let plp speak for himself, but I read it as "people in uniform are not counted in the employment/unemployment statistics, same as prisoners".
Toggle Commented Sep 3, 2018 on Links (9/1/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Uh? What is the insult?
Toggle Commented Sep 3, 2018 on Links (9/1/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
With that surname, it was obvious that he was never going to stay in Trump's pocket.
Toggle Commented Aug 25, 2018 on Links (8/23/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
If Trump keeps talking like this, maybe some enterprising g-man will figure out that the way to bring him down is to look at his tax returns.
Toggle Commented Aug 25, 2018 on Links (8/23/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
This sounds like a very good idea. A VAT as a source of SS increases would be seen as fair by everyone so it could garner political support from all sides.
Toggle Commented Aug 24, 2018 on Links (8/21/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
BTW, the outline of the Sanders plan, and how to pay for it, is still online at https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/
Toggle Commented Aug 24, 2018 on Links (8/21/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
How can he be "correct" about future tax rates? If he is making a guess he should say so. Instead, the quoted article suggests that Sanders was just lying ("...low-balling costs in an effort to obscure..."), and brings in for comparison the Republican tax plans, which he excoriated as being lies (and Ryan as a "flim-flam man" for espousing them). I totally understand how he (and you, I don't know) may think that Sanders's numbers were too optimistic. But the linked article was a hatchet job.
Toggle Commented Aug 24, 2018 on Links (8/21/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Don't know about philosophy, but this reminds me why I don't like Henri-Levy.
Toggle Commented Aug 23, 2018 on Links (8/21/18) at Economist's View
1 reply
Not sure how the Fed would allocate money like you suggest. E.g. how would the Fed put more money into, say, housing and prevent money from moving into the stock market?
1 reply
Yes, more than fair :-). The use of these labels is quite loose, I agree, but having to define them as you use them means the right concepts get discussed, which is progress. E.g. there was a raft of articles lately about why Denmark is not like Venezuela, and what is good about Denmark, and how the things that "socialists" want in the Democratic Party are things we promoted back when America was great, etc.
Toggle Commented Aug 20, 2018 on Links (8/18/18) at Economist's View
1 reply