Modern Monetary Policy

Yep I am about to bore the crap out of my reader…..when it comes to economics the average person glazes over and goes to that “happy place” in the mind until the talk is finished.

But I feel I need to drop some info on my readers……there has been much in the MSM about the Green New Deal and the proposals by a couple of candidates about taxing the rich……

I want to give my reader a look into the policies and the economics of them…..

First the call to “Tax The Rich”……

I don’t consider myself an MMTer, but there is a basic Keynesian concept which has been associated with MMT, which is both true and important. For the federal government, taxes are not about raising revenue, taxes are about reducing consumption to prevent inflation.

The point is that the federal government does not need taxes for revenue, since it can just print money. It instead taxes to create the room in the economy for government spending. This view is sometimes wrongly taken as a “get of jail free” card, where the government can spend whatever it wants without worrying about raising revenue.

That could be true in a deep downturn. However, if the economy is near its full employment level of output, where additional demand will lead to rising inflation, we are pretty much back in the world where we need taxes to offset spending. Any major increase in government spending will lead to higher inflation, unless we have higher taxes or have some other mechanism to reduce demand in the economy.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/02/20/modern-monetary-theory-and-taxing-the-rich/

Next how about that Green New Deal that is getting the conservs lathered up to the point that they resurrect a fear from the 1950s……

Much of the Democratic Party, including almost the entire pack of contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, has embraced the concept of a Green New Deal (GND). This is an ambitious plan for slashing greenhouse gas emissions, while at the same time creating good-paying jobs, improving education, and reducing inequality.

At this point, the specific policies entailed by these ambitious goals are largely up for grabs, as is the question of how to pay for this agenda. One way of paying for it, borrowing from the economic doctrine know as Modern Monetary Theory (MMT), is that we don’t have to.

Modern Monetary Theory argues that a government that prints its own currency is not constrained in its spending by its tax revenue. Some on the left have argued that we can just print whatever money we need to finance a GND. This claim does not make sense.

 
All this is possible…it will NEVER fly with conservs who live and die on tax cuts……a real shame….for this countries needs big ideas once again…..the Repubs are NOT those people.
Advertisements

Those Dem Economic Plans

*********Posted from a secret location known only to myself and everyone on the 4th floor of Memorial Hospital.********

The 2018 elections has brought us a few young freshmen Congresspeople and with the 2020 election looming large a candidate has issued a plan to solve our revenue people….

Let’s look at the economic proposal of announced presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren……

Two economists who are advising Warren, Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman of University of California at Berkeley, announced to the Washington Post that the senator is proposing an annual tax of two percent for assets over $50 million, as well as a three percent tax for assets above $1 billion. The proposal, the economists estimate, would raise $2.75 trillion over 10 years and would affect just .1 percent of American households—raising the percentage at which their wealth is taxed to just 4.3 percent from 3.2 percent. 

The “Ultra-Millionaire Tax” would apply to “all household assets…including residences, closely held businesses, assets held in trust, retirement assets, assets held by minor children, and personal property with a value of $50,000 or more,” according to a paper by the economists.

Warren’s proposal, which economist Thomas Piketty recommended in his book “Capital in the Twenty-First Century,” comes weeks after Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) first told the press about her plan to tax income over $10 million at 70 percent—a proposal supported by a majority of Americans, including 45 percent of Republicans, according to a poll by The Hill.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/01/24/warren-forces-issue-massive-economic-inequality-2020-debate-ultra-millionaire-tax

The freshman women we are calling AOC has a different take on taxing billionaires…..her thought is a 70% tax on them and her thoughts are rooted deep in American’s beliefs….

In 1835, Alexis de Tocqueville produced one of the earliest accounts of the American dream. In his famous study of the Jacksonian U.S., the Frenchman wrote that Americans possessed “the charm of anticipated success” — a ubiquitous optimism that he attributed to our country’s democratic character, and to the “general equality of condition” that prevailed among its “people.”

On Wednesday night, Sean Hannity took de Tocqueville to task. In the Fox News’ host’s telling, general economic equality is not a precondition for the American dream, but rather, an insurmountable obstacle to it — because the American dream is (apparently) to earn more than $10 million year without having to pay a top marginal tax rate higher than 37 percent.

Of course, Hannity did not actually frame his argument as a rebuke of de Tocqueville. His true target was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/ocasio-cortez-aocs-billionaires-taxes-hannity-american-democracy.html

Because her calls are so American that the GOP is running sacred from her proposals….yes running sacred!

What AOC is proposing

The short version is that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is proposing a new 70% tax bracket on income above $10 million. The increased tax on the wealthy would fund what Ocasio-Cortez calls a “Green New Deal,” which would combat both climate change and economic inequality.

Unsurprisingly, this has attracted lots of attention from both ends of the political spectrum. Some agree with the proposal. Some think it’s ludicrous and fear it would derail economic growth. Others think the rich should certainly pay more, but that the addition of a single super-high tax bracket isn’t the best solution.

And, like most tax proposals put forth by politicians, this one is misunderstood by much of the American public.

https://www.fool.com/taxes/2019/01/24/alexandria-ocasio-cortezs-70-tax-plan-what-all-ame.aspx

Let’s watch to see who wins this thing…..but first why would this have the GOP looking over their shoulders…..

Remember that massive tax cuts awhile back?  Appears it did NOTHING it was said it would do…….

The National Association of Business Economics’ (NABE) quarterly business conditions poll published on Monday found that while some companies reported accelerating investments because of lower corporate taxes, 84 percent of respondents said they had not changed plans. That compares to 81 percent in the previous survey published in October.

The White House had predicted that the massive fiscal stimulus package, marked by the reduction in the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, would boost business spending and job growth. The tax cuts came into effect in January 2018.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-economy-investment-idUSKCN1PM0B0

Turn The Page!

Tax The Rich

The chant goes up…Tax the rich….Tax the rich…..somewhere there will be villagers with pitchforks waiting on the arrival of the “tax man”…..

Enough fanciful stuff……there is a movement taking to the airwaves a proposal for a 70% tax on the ultra-rich…..and by damn the idea has got a majority approval in the polls…..

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) sparked a flood of hysterical and error-filled responses from the right when she suggested in a recent “60 Minutes” interview that America’s top marginal tax rate should be hiked to 70 percent to help pay for bold progressive programs, but a survey published on Tuesday found that the majority of Americans are on the freshman congresswoman’s side.

Conducted by The Hill in partnership with the market research firm HarrisX, the poll found that 59 percent of the U.S. public supports raising the marginal tax rate on the richest Americans to 70 percent. The poll also found a “surprising amount of support” for the proposal among Republicans, with 45 percent backing the idea along with 71 percent of Democrats.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/01/15/poll-shows-majority-

back-70-tax-rate-ultra-rich-ocasio-cortezs-radical-proposal

The media is not down with this proposal……however the economics of this are sound…looking at it without the bias of a political party……

Taxes impede economic growth and high taxes kill the economy, right?. This is the belief among many who criticize Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s proposal to raise taxes on the wealthy to 70% or more. But what does the evidence really tell us?

Do high taxes really hurt the economy as much as they believe, and will lowering them have much of an impact on stimulating it? The economic literature is clear — tax breaks to encourage economic relocation or investment decisions are inefficient and wasteful. Hundreds of studies reach this conclusion. When businesses are surveyed regarding factors important to their investment decisions, taxes often come in behind proximity to markets, suppliers, and the quality of the labor force. These other factors occupy a larger percentage of a business’s budget than do taxes, and all of them are far more critical to long-term success than are taxes. Businesses occasionally admit this. Nearly 62 percent of those interviewed in a California study on hiring tax credits indicated that they had never or rarely affected their decision to employ individuals.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/01/09/tax-the-rich-history-proves-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-may-be-correct/

I know this will not fly with the GOP for they think that tax cuts for the rich will solve all our economic problems…..wishful thinking….it has not done so in many decades and will not work now.

Time for the uber rich to start pulling their weight to society….they profit most from society then why can they not pay for their privilege?

Why Not?

As a matter of fact……the entire “progressive agenda” is fiscally  responsible….the agenda…..

  • We are currently planning to spend $45.2 trillion over the next decade on healthcare as a country.
  • A single payer Medicare for All system would cost $32.6 trillion over the next decade, saving us $13.2 trillion.
  • Freezing defense spending at 2017 levels would save us $780 billion over the next decade.
  • Reversing the Trump tax cuts would bring in an additional $1.9 trillion of revenue.
  • Reversing the Bush tax cuts would bring in an additional $3.3 trillion of revenue.
  • Closing three corporate tax loopholes (exclusion of rental income, capital gains, and deferral of controlled foreign corporations’ income) would bring in another $2.72 trillion of revenue.
  • If the entire “progressive agenda” is implemented, we would save $18.74 trillion over the next decade.

I approve of the agenda and will support it as long as too many changes are not included.

That is where it will not fly in DC….it is fiscally responsible…..the GOP has NO idea how to be fiscally responsible…..sounds good in sound bytes but the GOP just cannot find the on switch to fiscal responsibility.

Reaganomics To The Rescue

Since the 1980’s Reaganomics has been the saving grace of the GOP…..they use clever propaganda to get the American people to believe the stupidity of trickle down economics or Reaganomics…tax cuts labeled tax reform that benefits few and those are the wealthy.

There is a good chance that all the hard work done by Repubs in 2017 may be for naught…..Reaganomics may not save the GOP this time…..

Republican hopes for holding control of Congress in the midterm elections hinge on the success of Reagan-style tax cuts and deregulation. However, without significant progress early this year on entitlements and infrastructure — with substantial focus on the chronic problems of rural communities and smaller cities — those policies may not prove to be enough.

During the Bush-Obama years, annual economic growth was only 1.8%, but the prosperity instigated by the expansion of financial services, biotechnology and digital industries was adequate to satisfy voters in the citadels of progressive thinking on the two coasts and among communities supported by major universities.

President Donald Trump won an unlikely victory in 2016 by energizing voters in the nation’s interior — places that fell victim to globalization and were left behind by the recent recovery.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/reaganomics-may-not-save-the-republicans-2018-01-08

2018 will be the tell of the tape…..will the economic double talk win the day?

Will Reagaomics save the GOP?

Voodoo Economics Returns

Roll us over and do it again!

Our Congress is once again on a break (is there ever a time when this isn’t so?)  They have tried health issues and failed…..they are talking abut some sort of gun regulations…..and since nothing is sticking to the wall then they will go to the ever popular tax reform.

And since the GOP is in control then we will try their fix for the economy…..supply-side solutions.

This solution has not been a answer for 30+ years….hey, why not try it again?

Our president has decided the “voodoo economics” will solve all the ills of our economy….

Billionaire US President Donald Trump wants to reform the US tax system, like others before him. But his plan looks more like tax cuts for America’s wealthiest and some of the world’s biggest corporations.

Although it’s yet to be fleshed out, it’s based on the idea that the cuts will pay for themselves, with the economic growth they generate in years to come. Yet, that’s never happened in the history of US tax cuts.

In economics jargon: this is a classic supply-side response to a demand-side problem. But why help companies and investors if workers are the ones in trouble?

It’s been done before and George HW Bush famously called it “voodoo economics” to discredit the notion that cutting tax rates will increase revenues.

Source: Donald Trump’s ‘voodoo economics’ | USA | Al Jazeera

An IST factoid:  Tax cuts have NEVER paid of themselves!

But you will be asked to buy into the dream anyway…..you cannot drain the swamp and keep the crap in place.

I have written on this subject before and pointed to the fallacy……..

Source: It Is Always Supply Side Economics – In Saner Thought

Source: The Humor That Is Trickle Down Economics – In Saner Thought

Source: Let’s End The Illusion Now! – In Saner Thought

A laughable solution that the population falls for almost every time.

Trumponomics

I recently read a fellow blogger and friend’s post about the Pres. Trump and the MSM on economics…..and it got me to thinking….but before I throw my couple of pennies into the fray…here is his post….

Source: Lame Stream Ignores Record-Breaking Stock Market Performance Under Trump | The More Than Unlikely Kingdom Of An Imaginary Billionaire Named John

I have said many times that Trump needs to hype the excellent market figures and the unemployment stats when he makes his on-the-road speeches.

There will be some that will say that the good economic news is just hold overs from Obama….but Trump is doing what every president, nay every leader has done….if you are the sitting leader then take credit for the good news…nothing wrong there.

After I read my fellow blogger’s post I got to looking into the thing some will call “Trumponomics”.

I found an interview that was posted on the pro-Libertarian site, The Unz Review……

SHARMINI PERIES: It’s the Real News Network. I’m Sharmini Peries coming to you from Baltimore. The rise of stock prices in the US stock market could be an indication of economic growth and prosperity, but it could also be an indication of the concentration of wealth of the rich and powerful. Which is it? To answer that question, we need to look at other economic indicators. In the press conference that President Trump had just a few days ago announcing his new chief of staff, General John Kelly, Trump took the opportunity to give himself credit for the rising stock prices. Let’s listen.

Source: Trumponomics and the Stock Market – The Unz Review

I found another op-ed that covers the phenon called “Trumponomics”

It has been six months since US President Donald Trump took office.

Amid a slow and disorderly White House transition – including a string of prominent departures – and an ongoing investigation into his Russia ties, Trump is trying to divert the world’s attention to the US economy.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average just hit the 22,000 mark for the first time in its 121-year history. Stocks headed higher even as Wall Street lost confidence that Trump’s election proposals like tax cuts and infrastructure spending will be pushed through Congress.

Source: ‘Trumponomics’: Making America great again? | USA | Al Jazeera

Trump needs to focus on these small successes and less on who said what about him…..make the case for Trumponomics…..it will force the MSM to cover and comment.

Closing Thought–12May17

DAMN!  I Wish I’d Said That!

Ever hear something that you like and thought that you had wish you had said it?

Like “I Think, Therefore I Am” or something similar.

Looks like our president Trump is claiming phrases as his own…..like when I tried to copyright “You’re fired”……well he is at it again…..

President Trump is making headlines because of an interview with the Economist, though probably not the ones he expected. One theme is on an odd claim he made about inventing the long-used phrase “priming the pump,” and another on the possibility of his releasing his tax returns—when he’s out of the White House. The details:

  • At one point, Trump asks the interviewer if he’s ever heard of the phrase “priming the pump,” which has been widely used in economic circles for at least the better part of a century. “Have you heard that expression used before? Because I haven’t heard it. I mean, I just … I came up with it a couple of days ago and I thought it was good. It’s what you have to do.”
  • As the Hill reports, Merriam-Webster quickly pounced. “‘Pump priming’ has been used to refer to government investment expenditures since at least 1933,” it tweeted. Another said: “The phrase ‘priming the pump’ dates to the early 19th century.”
  • At the Washington Post, Philip Bump is baffled. He cites multiple examples of Trump himself using the phrase previously and thus floats the possibility that Trump was joking. Or maybe he just “slipped into his long-standing pattern of taking credit where it wasn’t due.”
  • On the tax returns, Trump was asked if he’d be willing to release them in order to get Democratic support for his tax plan, notes CNBC. “That’s a very interesting question,” he said. “I doubt it.” He added that “at some point I’ll release them” because “I’m very proud of them actually. I did a good job.” And later: “I might release them after I’m out of office.”

Click for the full transcript, which includes the president’s thoughts on “Trumponomics” as referring to “self-respect as a nation” and “trade deals that have to be fair, and somewhat reciprocal, if not fully reciprocal.”

Does he not know the power of the Google?

I know most Republicans have not had an original thought in decades…..and what thoughts they have are usually from someone else…..but this is just sad.

No I do not think this is news….but I do think that we should know how silly and ignorant our president can be.

Enough!  Time to shut it down…..go now have some fun and a couple of laughs.