Bojo Vs Hunt, Will they go Brain Cell to Brain Cell on the “Magic Money Tree”? #ConquestofDough

download.jpeg

 

 

https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2017/06/01/the-magic-money-tree-a-poem-by-roger-g-lewis-magicmoneytree/

 

The Magic Money Tree and Private Banks , misunderstood and kind to small children and animals?or Just another Fix of Crony Capitalists

https://longhairedmusings.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/the-magic-money-tree-and-private-banks-misunderstood-and-kind-to-small-children-and-animalsor-just-another-fix-of-crony-capitalists/

Neo-Liberalism, Billy No Mates? , or, just misunderstood and kind to small children and animals
Discussion with Founder member of The people’s party/Ecology Party and Now The Greens Clive Lord.
In the recent hustings for the Green Party leadership for the Green Party of England and Wales I have had a few interesting dialogues with Clive Lord and sought out some of his writing to see what made and still makes him Tick. I have also had a similar exchange of tweets and comments with Dereck Wall another former speaker candidate for the Green Party of England and wales.

Clives Stich is citizens income or universal basic income. Its mine too so we have a common objective and our reasoning to get to that place one would think would be similar. Well to answer that yes and no. Clive and I agree that exponential growth on a finite planet is impossible and that the strain on the Common resources of the planet is to great and decisions uninformed by externalities are less than sensible. We are in a completely different place on Political Economy though and our understanding of Money and Money creation.

The weird absence of money and finance in economic theory

26 Jun, 2019 at 14:45 | Posted in Economics | 7 Comments

Consider the problem of money. Money is of central importance to any modern capitalist market economy. Yet it is mainly sociologists, philosophers and dissenters that have maintained an interest in what money “is” with a view to continued critique and development … One might think this is because economics has already provided an agreed clear concept of money. But this is not the case. Contemporary economics defines money in terms of function (unit of account, store of value, medium of exchange), but puts aside both the actual history of money (after an origin story) and the conceptual problem of money, both of which likely affect the functionality of money in the broader sense of its role and consequence in real systems …

barterWhat appears weird to those outside of the mainstream is that in economic theory in general money is typically absent. It is usually assumed that in a properly functioning market system prices express the value of output such that all prices effectively become representative of ratios between goods and services (and inputs), and this ultimately means a market system operates as though it were barter. Money simply becomes the convenient symbol (in its medium of exchange guise) that expresses these ratios. As such, it has no independent significance, and one ought to look through money to the operation of “real” economic factors, and can in effect ignore money as a contributory, contextualising or significant component in a system …

The role of money in real systems has generally been peripheralised because of an arbitrary limitation created by the assumption that money is separate from and then circumspectly significant to “real” factors. This statement may seem odd to a non-economist, since we live in a world where monetary policy is high profile, and a great deal of attention is paid to central bank policy (inflation targeting for price stability), and to the existence and activity of banks.

Jamie Morgan / RWER

http://econintersect.com/pages/opinion/opinion.php?post=201805212209

posted on 21 May 2018

Some Preliminary Questions For MMT
by Steve Keen, Steve Keen’s Debtwatch

I had an impromptu debate with Warren Mosler (see end of this article), the founder and still one of the leading figures of “Modern Monetary Theory” recently. We disagreed on the role of trade deficits, and this has led another MMT luminary, Bill Mitchell, to write two commentaries critiquing my position (see “Trade and external finance mysteries – Part 1” and “Trade and finance mysteries – Part 2”.

 

Bourgeois resolution. A poem in Three Voices for added 4th part Harmony.

 

 
This poem is about pedagogy of the oppressed it represents all that I have come to understand about representative democracy and the disjoint between Power, Power relations and Political Power. Politicians claiming Democratic objectives in the interests of the Constituents of the communities they represent but actually patronize. This is the Tension between Elites from Grande Bourgeois to Petit Bourgeoise and their aversion too all forms of popular expressions of solidarity by the working Class. Anything outside the boundaries set by the Bourgeoisie sensibilities and aesthetic mores of the Political and Chattering classes is deemed vulgar and viscous in the Vice full sense.
As with the revolution the resolution will be Live.
We interrupt your discord to bring you this resolution
from popular consciousness.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The New Blockbuster Novel. ConquestofDough.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.