Forum Thread

Sanders' MMT Economic Advisers at the People's Summit in Chicago

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 6 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    Video from Stephanie Kelton's and Bill Black's Break Out Session at the People's Summit in Chicago

    Audio's not great, so turn your speakers up.

    Stephanie Kelton and Bill Black were both economic advisers to Sen. Sanders' Presidential Campaign.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    There are three combined forces that combined together are the motivation for almost everything. Faster, cheaper and easier. That is the biggest influence on financial matters. Business people won't put off making a nickel today for the chance of making seven cents next year. The only irrational act I have seen business do is waste excessive amounts of money for union busting and anti labor. But the driving force can always be resolved to cheaper, easier and faster. That is always the way it is. So, no matter how you describe or analyze anything it comes down to cheap, easy and fast. That is why derivatives are so big and growing. They are the chespest, easiest and fastest way to make a profit. That caused 2008 because uncontrolled unregulated securities were given a free ride through the CFMA. And the same thing is growing again because you can't deny easy money to the people that make the rules. And here is an important distinction that makes derivatives dangerous. Derivatives are not investing in the stock market. They are investing "about" the stock market. They are of no use to the stock market. If all CFMA created derivatives were abolished the world would be a better place. No body would lose income. Real jobs producing investing would reappear. All the same people would still have all the money. Nothing bad would happen. There is nothing else that is that big that eliminating would be positive. They were illegal to start with and the CFMA legalized them.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    Carlitos -- The audio made it very difficult to follow, especially when Stephanie was talking. I had trouble following the overall conversations. Will there be a written transcript at some point? I picked up bits and pieces, but I had to replay several sections to understand what they were saying.

    Thanks for sharing anyway.

    I noticed one of the comments. Does Bernie Sanders understand and endorse MMT?

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    Yes, the audio sucks cause it's off the camera. I had to turn my speakers up to hear Kelton, but Black talks a bit louder.

    Don't know about a transcript.

    Privately, Bernie understands and agrees with Kelton on MMT. She has a very close relationship with the Senator. They dined regularly to discuss the economy when she was his appointee on the Senate Budget Committee. Kelton took the picture of Sanders' impromptu meeting with Sandra Bland's mother.

    Publicly, Bernie is too afraid to say those things, and not a good enough economist himself to really explain and lead a room on this discussion. So he demurs publicly and tries to avoid those questions. That's why he put an emphasis on "Other Deficits", e.g. the jobs, output, and infrastructure deficits.

    At the Huffpost with Ryan Grim, on video available on Facebook, Jill Stein was asked about MMT, said she was in agreement with it, and that we need to have more public debate about the implications. Here's a link if you have an account there:

    The exchange is towards the end of the video. She kinda of muffs up some of the discussion, confusing QE with money creation, as many do, and her policy proposals haven't changed, but that's what she said.

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    Carlitos --Yes, I believe quite a few politicians have a basic understanding of MMT. Certain Republicans do, and that's why they have no problem about running up deficits while they are in office, and then decrying deficits while Democrats are in office. They see it as a tool for their political advantage.

    We should have a public discourse to educate the public, but I'm afraid that 99.9 percent of the populace is so ingrained in their thinking of the federal budget as the same as a household budget. It is hard to change brains. So advocates have to use fuzzy language to obfuscate the subject.

    Any politicians that starts pushing MMT concepts will be ostracized by their political opponents.

    Look how Sarah Palin twisted the End of Life Decisions into "Death Panels".

  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?

    Have to be skilled at it. And a good student of MMT. And have the right personality for the job.

    Can't let things said go unchallenged.

    But if any of these talking heads goes against a skilled MMT informed person, they will be left tongue tied and exposed, and their solutions are the ones observers and voters will reject. There is no contest.

    I have debated or explained MMT to hundreds of politically minded people and students. The only ones who don't get it have some type of learning problem, such as a disability or an ideology that gets in the way.