Venezuela and Socialism

[Eric the Green]

(03-28-2017, 05:17 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(03-27-2017, 01:06 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(03-27-2017, 12:47 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:

(05-26-2016, 12:54 AM)Galen Wrote:

(05-25-2016, 08:26 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: We are far away from the scenario of the Soviet Union in 1990. It's when the police terror weakened and the Soviet Union started to take on democratic characteristics (free and competitive elections and multiple political parties) that the system began to break down.

Given the amount federal debt and unfunded liabilities we are not that far from such a moment.  At the time it looked like the Soviet Union was going to be with us and then suddenly it wasn't.  I think one of the reasons the Fed is holding interest rates at zero is because of what would happen to the federal deficit.  In order for the status quo to continue people must believe and when they stop it changes or disappears.

Another thing that happened in the Soviet Union was that people started using the bureaucracy against itself.  Combined with the fact that most did not do more than the minimum which helped sink the system.  Gorbachev tried to save the Soviet System incrementally but it was too far gone.

1.Yeah, but the "status quo" is the Federal Government and assorted scammy oligarchies[Big Pharma, Big Oil, Big  Banking, etc. ] put together.

2. Kinser79's .sig has the solution, pretty much. 

Naaah, kinser has no "solutions"

Quote:As for Trump, if by choice or accident, he crashes the financial markets, that would be a plus.

No, it would not be, because the oligarchs are always in the best position after crashes, and they take advantage of them to concentrate their power.

Quote:


Globalization is last, but yeah, I don't like it either.  I see no reason why the US citizens via the MIC have to protect shipping lanes all by itself for something that I have no use for.  

You have a point there. Not very practical, but then, since when is Rags practical? But yeah, who needs shipping lanes when we should be making things and buying things in America?

But that Trashcan guy you keep posting is ugly!

1. I like Kinser79's .sig. Sorry.

A horrible, damn rap song

Quote:2. Crashes: It depends, I suppose. For example, if the banks were not bailed out in 2008, but rather left to self destruct, then yes, we lose the bankrupt banks. What should have been done is to make small depositors whole, via the FDIC, with strict adherence to the insured limit. Yes, this would have resulted in a different bailout, --- the FDIC would have gotten bailed out. However, a crashed banking system fucks up the grifters in this case. Sorry, Eric, but you know, so much underbrush, so many fires to set.  The goal should be to let all of the rackets self destruct, but mitigate against fallout to the real economy [fast foodies, high tech, renewables, critical supply chains, and utilities, etc.]  After all, when it comes to the Austrian School, [yeah, I took economics in college and the courses discussed the different schools without much bias.] I'd say I'm pretty much a heterodox of Austrian/MMT.
You see, no school, to me has all of the answers. I'm not a true believer as such. So, when I rail against the Fed for mucking up the price of money, bloated housing/stock/bond bubbles, the Austrian School makes sense there. That's a classic bubble scene. Bubbles are the direct result of the Fed jacking with interest rates. That makes capital appear cheaper than it really is. Mispriced capital allows economically non viable ventures to begin and expand. At some point, the supply of the products from said ventures can't fetch a profitable return, and go bust.
As for MMT, the thing to do there is again, chuck the Fed and have the treasury department issue the currency.
That would fix the problem of debt having an exponential growth rate, while revenue has a linear pattern. Those 2 facts make any fiat currency which has its origin in debt non sustainable. In order to use MMT properly, some strict controls on printing money need to be in place and enforced. The most straight forward way is for the Federal government to stop lying about the inflation rate. Let's not repeat the mistake that was made wrt Keynesian economics and keep on spending, no matter what. That eventually, but not immediately causes some sort of inflation. That means to get there, and I'm not sure the US has the discipline to do it. It's mandatory that if inflation exceeds some low number like 2%, that taxes have to go up to soak up the excess money. I do think MMT is better in that the theory is based on the fact that "taxes drive money". We'd depart from the need for a central bank and all of the trouble we've had with strict fiscal policy. American citizens would need to get some education on what MMT policy is, how it works, and the need to suffer pain every now and again with tax hikes to forestall a repeat of the 1970's.  In short, the inflation rate determines the issuance of new currency or destruction thereof via taxation.

I agree that balance between spending and restraint is good. I am not convinced that the Fed is the proper whipping boy for policy mistakes. Deregulation was the main culprit in the 2008 crash and all other crashes. Restrain economic libertarians, is the principle answer. IOW don't vote Republican.

Quote:2. Rags is not practical?   That, Eric, is strange. I would not expect such a remark from you.  I can see resident X'ers saying that, but you? Sorry Eric, you just pointed 1 finger at me, but 4 right back at yourself. IOW, Eric is more of a Boomer than Rags.

Let's say you are pragmatic, in that you look after your own money and want to make it, but not always practical when it comes to political ideas, because you tend to make extreme blanket statements. So, not defending shipping lanes makes some sense, in that we shouldn't risk WWIII over it, but international trade is not something to stop entirely or anything like that. It just needs to be more fair. Or not getting involved in the Middle East at all; yeah, very desirable, but not very practical. We're stuck. Abolish the FED; naah; just make it more transparent. We need a central bank. It does provide some balance when it's needed. Down with all SJWs and multiculturalism, etc.? No, although activists and pushy ideologues of all stripes can be annoying. etc.. IOW Bipolarity is not always "practical."

Quote:3. Trashcan man:  Yes, that. Trashcan man is a schizo and I have Bipolar.  When I saw that youtube vid, it was like wow, there's a character I can relate to.  I don't have the hallucinations , but I do burn shit when stuff pisses me off.
Watching fires burn is very calming for some reason. You know, as a kid, my favorite aunt who lived in a rural area would task me in burning the trash in her burn barrel. I'd spark the trash and made sure it burned real good. I even got an old bothersome tire to burn. She tried and tried to spark it, but to no avail. She asked if I could get rid of it.
---- I did. I knew to get an old piece of plywood, place the tire on top, stuff a bunch of plastic inside the tire and spark that.  It worked, Eric. Strange talents come in handy, man.

I recommend calming ambient music instead of looking at ugly guys.
http://stillstream.fm

Quote:4. "But yeah, who needs shipping lanes when we should be making things and buying things in America?" :
You bet man. If countries are making maney hand over fist shipping their stuff to us, said countries need to chip in and defend those as well. America is not rich anymore, America loses big time with current trading arrangements, and American exceptional-ism is a fake meme propagated by NeoCONS. So, yeah, when it comes to imports/exports/economic policy, America First.

I agree.