dagblog - Comments for "Radical Mellonism"

Letsgetitdone, I swear I

we are stardust — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:19:11 +0000

Letsgetitdone, I swear I click on your comment but can;'t see it on the thread. I actually saw this up at steve waldman's today, came to find you at my.fdl, but didn't. Nice to see you here.

http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/1357.html

And thanks for the offer of help the other day; didn't see until yesterday, but I am waaay too far behind to ask intelligent questions. At least on MMT. ;o)

MMT doesn't assume a closed

letsgetitdone — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:12:18 +0000

In reply to I've been collecting links to

MMT doesn't assume a closed economic system. Here,

here, and

here,

are three of many articles that take the external sector into account.

As am I.

miguelito — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 01:31:53 +0000

In reply to Thanks, good to see someone

As am I.

Thanks, good to see someone

EmmaZahn — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 01:00:18 +0000

In reply to I think you might enjoy

Thanks, good to see someone else advocating a public bank option. I think I will follow Dr. Hudson's blog for awhile.

I think you might enjoy

miguelitoh2o — Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:36:10 +0000

In reply to I agree. We may all face

I think you might enjoy reading this from Michael Hudson at creditwritedowns.com Emma:

The problem is that the bankers’ solution – the inevitable result of Mr. Greenspan’s policy of shifting central planning onto Wall Street – is that it will culminate in the anarchy of debt deflation, deepening unemployment, more real estate foreclosures, and capital flight out of the dollar. So why not let the government say, “OK, we’ll provide a public-option alternative. And if this works, we’ll use it as a model for our public health insurance option. And then we will look to public banking options, and perhaps to Dennis Kucinich’s American Monetary Act to turn you commercial banks back into savings banks to stem your wild speculation at the economy’s expense.” (Just a modest proposal here for argument’s sake to quiet down the bankers’ threats.)

That too.

cmaukonen — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 00:53:00 +0000

In reply to you may mean cajones,

That too.

you may mean cajones,

we are stardust — Sat, 02 Apr 2011 00:49:20 +0000

In reply to The problem is that there is

you may mean cajones, huevos...

That may happen as well.

cmaukonen — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 23:41:27 +0000

In reply to I meant forced by

That may happen as well.

Thanks for the link, Emma.

we are stardust — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 23:27:08 +0000

In reply to I've been collecting links to

Thanks for the link, Emma. You are waaay ahead of me on the subject. The only reason I did the primer courses was when a few economists were fearing the credit bubble was about to burst, and so I thought I'd better pay some attention, then to FinReg and it's inadequacies. Other than that, 'bout all I know is how much we have buried in a can outside. ;o) And that' we'll never have more...

There was a very good essay

cmaukonen — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 23:12:36 +0000

In reply to I've been collecting links to

There was a very good essay on Sam Smith's progressive review site on the very subject of the nature of money a while ago but I think he has since taken it down.