MMT’s Snipers for Slavery. MMT advocates of debt slavery?

 Sniper fire reported at the Golem XIV Blog.

          • Roger January 21, 2016 at 10:11 am # 
            Blew all together.” [894]
            Thus interest rolls on interest as wave upon wave, and he that is involved in debt struggles against the load that bears him down, but cannot swim away and escape, but sinks to the bottom, and carries with him to ruin his friends that have gone security for him. But Crates the Theban, though he had neither duns nor debts, and was only disgusted at the distracting cares of housekeeping, gave up a property worth eight talents, and assumed the philosopher’s threadbare cloak and wallet, and took refuge in philosophy and poverty. ,,And Anaxagoras left his sheep-farm. But why need I mention these? since the lyric poet Philoxenus, obtaining by lot in a Sicilian colony much substance and a house abounding in every kind of comfort, but finding that luxury and pleasure and absence of refinement was the fashion there, said, “By the gods these comforts shall not undo me, I will give them up,” and he left his lot to others, and sailed home again. But debtors have to put up with being dunned, subjected to tribute, suffering slavery, passing debased coin, and like Phineus, feeding certain winged Harpies, who carry off and lay violent hands on their food, not at the proper season, for they get possession of their debtors’ corn before it is sown, and they traffic for oil before the olives are ripe; and the money-lender says, “I have wine at such and such a price,” and takes a bond for it, when the grapes are yet on the vine waiting for Arcturus to ripen them.”
            [894] “Odyssey,” v. 291-295.
            The domain that this blog is published on has expired. The domain actually now redirects to a porn hub of the same name. This particular blog has much as anything else I have read in the last 4 years has been profoundly influential on my thinking. I recommend it highly.
          • JohnG January 21, 2016 at 10:30 am # 
            Total non-government debt to total non-government credit = 0
            Total government (net) debt = total non-government (financial) assets
            Ergo government debt = non-government savings.
            In stock/flow terms (I – S) + (G – T) + (X – M) = 0.
            • Roger January 21, 2016 at 11:22 am # 
              the questions of Economics and its accounting mechanisms and sums as it were are one thing what is the wider concern to me is the Political aspects of Economic necessities. The Capitalistic control of Money creation is anti democratic that is unacceptable to me. Replacing the Capitalistic method of banking control by substituting the State or a proxy for the state in the intermediary role is also unacceptable to me, my objection could be summed up as ´´no intermediation without representation´´
              ”The present time, likewise, is that peculiar time, which never happens to a nation but once, viz. the time of forming itself into a government. Most nations have let slip the opportunity, and by that means have been compelled to receive laws from their conquerors, instead of making laws for themselves. First, they had a king, and then a form of government; whereas, the articles or charter of government, should be formed first, and men delegated to execute them afterwards: but from the errors of other nations, let us learn wisdom, and lay hold of the present opportunity—To begin government at the right end.” (1737–1809). Common Sense. 1776.
              Of the present ability of America, with some miscellaneous reflexions.s.IV para20.
              The whole of the intercourse between all of the actors in Civil Society can not be reduced to a balance sheet expressed only in Monetary terms,a governments and a states success can not be expressed as a mathematical function proving that all of the terms sum to zero.
              That a complex dynamic system can not be expressed in a function without induction is what Tarski shows , there is plenty of writing which grapples with the conflicts of idealism and materialism, I like Graebers Parmenidese vs Hereclitus
              ”philosophy, after all, really begins with the quarrel between Heraclitus and Parmenides; a quarrel that Parmenides won.´´
              I also like Steve Keens Economist Quipp ”Thats all well and good in reality but does it work in Theory´´
              Roger January 17, 2016 at 2:15 pm #
              Yes really JohnG, What she says regarding the Expelled are very pertinent , Sociologists, Psychologists and Antropoligists have a lot to add to Economic Thought the orthodoxies of which have become so bogged down in their own dogmas.
              ”A wit once defined an economist as someone who, when shown that something works in practice, replies “Ah! But does it work in theory?”
              Steve Keen Quoted here today
              Quines Two Dogmas of empiricism gives many insights to the limitations of technocratic faith systems.
              ´´ As an empiricist I continue to think of the conceptual scheme of science as a tool, ultimately, for predicting future experience in the light of past experience. Physical objects are conceptually imported into the situation as convenient intermediaries — not by definition in terms of experience, but simply as irreducible posits18b comparable, epistemologically, to the gods of Homer. Let me interject that for my part I do, qua lay physicist, believe in physical objects and not in Homer’s gods; and I consider it a scientific error to believe otherwise.´´
              Most of all I like Rupert Sheldrakes, ” 6 mins 50 quoting Thomas Mc Kenna he says
              ”Give us one free miracle and we´ll explain the rest”
              And the Pragmatist in me inspired by C S Pierce my favorite modern philosopher and one of the finest logicians that has come down to us says this.
              CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: In order to
              reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues
              as intellectual honesty and sincerity a
              nd a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientific
              inquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them
              to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to
              know how things really were … (1-34).
              [Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake
              (1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with in
              tentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235).
              [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines wh
              at the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which
              determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham
              reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men
              come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative….
              • JohnG January 21, 2016 at 11:54 am # 
                Roger, please don’t clutter up my comments with your drivel anymore.
                I don’t care who you quote (that’s just a blind for not being able to think for yourself). Nor do I care what you think money ought to be.
                Money is virtual. That’s it. Get over it.
                I reject your analysis totally.And I reject your motivations i.e. personal profit.
                You’re not a dissenter, Roger. You’re a UI for the status quo. Like your mate Wesley.Albeit he is a higher fuctioning I.
                The banksters are playing 3 dimensional chess while you and Wesley are coming to grips with Drafts. Maybe Wesley has mastered Drafts.
                • Roger January 21, 2016 at 12:10 pm # 
                  John G,
                  It’s a shame you are unable to discuss views that differ from your own.
                  All the Best
                  • JohnG January 21, 2016 at 12:20 pm # 
                    It’s a shame that you don’t get it.
                    When I’m presented with different facts, I change my mind.
                    Clearly you don’t.
                    But 2+2=4 in my world. And more aptly -2 + 2 = 0.
                    And you nuts are arguing with that.
                  • JohnG January 21, 2016 at 12:44 pm # 
                    And if you genuinely think that what you and your mate here have done is engage in discussion, you’re an even bigger idiot than I thought.
                    Bulls On Parade”
                    Come wit it now!
                    Come wit it now!
                    The microphone explodes, shattering the molds
                    Either drop tha hits like de la O or get tha fuck off tha commode
                    Wit tha sure shot, sure ta make tha bodies drop
                    Drop an don’t copy yo, don’t call this a co-op
                    Terror rains drenchin’, quenchin’ tha thirst of tha power dons
                    That five sided fist-a-gon
                    Tha rotten sore on tha face of mother earth gets bigger
                    Tha triggers cold empty ya purse
                    Rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    Weapons not food, not homes, not shoes
                    Not need, just feed the war cannibal animal
                    I walk tha corner to tha rubble that used to be a library
                    Line up to tha mind cemetary now
                    What we don’t know keeps tha contracts alive an movin’
                    They don’t gotta burn tha books they just remove ’em
                    While arms warehouses fill as quick as tha cells
                    Rally round tha family, pockets full of shells
                    Rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    They rally round tha family! With a pocket full of shells
                    Bulls on parade
                    Come wit it now!
                    Come wit it now!
                    Bulls on parade!
                    Bulls on parade!
                    Bulls on parade!
                    Bulls on parade!
                    Bulls on parade!
                  • Roger January 21, 2016 at 1:00 pm # 
                    But 2+2=4 in my world. And more aptly -2 + 2 = 0.
                    Who is arguing with your sums John G, I am not arguing with the arithmetic you have just put forward it is consistent within a clearly defined and ordered system , it is neither complex or dynamic and should anyone wish to propose a change in the meaning of any of the terms they could do that and make others aware of the proposed change in value of any of the terms.
                    Get it? I take it form this that you are saying that I do not get that MMT is the only answer we need to bother ourselves with.
                    My not getting MMT extends to the transparency and accountability of the intermediary institution. No Intermediation without representation meaning who’s aims are served or prioritised and what are the boundaries.This is seeking a clarification and that clarification requires political disclosure regarding which feedbacks will be prioritised in meeting the wishes of those’ who are supposed to be represented.
                    Tony Benn once said this
                    “The House will forgive me for quoting five democratic questions that I have developed during my life. If one meets a powerful person–Rupert Murdoch, perhaps, or Joe Stalin or Hitler–one can ask five questions: what power do you have; where did you get it; in whose interests do you exercise it; to whom are you accountable; and, how can we get rid of you? Anyone who cannot answer the last of those questions does not live in a democratic system.”
                    Tony Benn Commons Hansard [16 Nov 1998: Column 685] Volume 319 Debate on: European Parliamentary Elections Bill , from 7.20 pm
                    Regarding Facts changing and Minds changing
                    Keynes is always ready to contradict not only his colleagues but also himself whenever circumstances make this seem appropriate. So far from feeling guilty about such reversals of position, he utilizes them as pretexts for rebukes to the less nimble-minded. Legend says that while conferring with Roosevelt at Quebec, Churchill sent Keynes a cable reading, “Am coming around to your point of view.” His Lordship replied, “Sorry to hear it. Have started to change my mind.”
                    Facts actually do not change and the pedant in me which comes out when I am irritated so I will point it out. Our understanding of facts change given different contexts and when interpreted in the light of other evidence. I did recommend some Ken Wilber earlier John G. Worth taking a look at that , everybody whose views you find challenging of your own is not an idiot, I may well be an idiot but do consider that I am not statistically significant sample. I should also add that Facts are sometimes demoted to mistakes. When a Fact is found to be mistaken in is obviously no longer a fact. Even things that are facts and accepted as such might fall out of favour distinctions between Belief, Truth and Knowledge are important here which is very basic philosophy.

Author: rogerglewis Looking for a Job either in Sweden or UK. Freelance, startups, will turń my hand to anything.

Leave a Reply