when there is no exit
exit joins voice in paradise lost
we have no parasitism law in the states
no gubmint enforced universal obligation to job attend
or be in the hospital the military or prison or prison lite ...ie school
from say age 5 to 16 we got such a do hickey
but after that yer free to slack
however there are other means of enforcement eh ??
lots of the super structure of a corporate dominated social system
will involve the cummulative trial and error burkean
construction of a zillion bars blocks and purp walks at nearly all job exits
if one considers corecion a key power of the corporation
how is it effected
that is
given thefree and clear right of job exit
that indeed defines
free labor !!!!!!
clue
there is no right of free... re entry
if you contrive to tie lots of social requirements to job holding
then withhold the job holding
from a signifigant chunk of every jobblers "reference group"
imagine the mayhem
a decent universal social dividend plan would create
if simple ass citizenship afforded you
a " humane minimum material condition "
regardless of your daily social contribution
of course our modest portfolio-ate
already enjoys this right of free exit
and with no re entry required
maybe that's why we can't just up and legislate
like the russian soviets did
universal job attendence
we don't cause we need to protect these
job site shy
widows and orphans with a modest independent means
to look practically at this
apparently that number
the petty rentier number
is small enough not to reduce the corporate take away enough
to wash out their compunctions
and so we find these folks shielded
as much as anything
by a cloud of "maybe that'll be me some day "
its better then 2 to 1
that fantasy realized by "the other "
actually works synergistically
with the get a fucking job ethos
as a good jesus fearing shit assed job attending amurikan
one notices the welfare slacker
and applies the verbal blow torch
but my family ???
me and my sisters ??
as idle useless greedy and parasitic a batch of God's s critters
as you'd find any where on the planet
well
apparently we're acceptable to the multitudes
or at least so far as i know
since no effective organized body of my fellow citizens
outside of union square new york city
is trying to make us paines contribute to society
at least not any outfits
like those organized
to cattle prod
them infernal slacker cows
back into the job pit
tough love gets the ugly stick...
nothin like the thought of adminsterin'
the brutal shock
of immediate and total
deprivation of gubmint provided benefits
to put a troubled jobbler spirit to sleep at nite
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Monday, August 29, 2011
the two stages of labor saving mechanization /automation
first stage
technical success
the ability to reduce labor hours technically
second stage economic viability
the ability to produce more cheaply
with the labor saving process then with the existing process
lower the wage the slower the progressions
the new regime of industrial wages will retard progress
technical success
the ability to reduce labor hours technically
second stage economic viability
the ability to produce more cheaply
with the labor saving process then with the existing process
lower the wage the slower the progressions
the new regime of industrial wages will retard progress
how much fun can you have with a labor time exchange system
recall john francis bray the founder of labor time exchange
here's doc M's toononomic take
meet the exchange economy of peter and paul
"One hour of Peter's labor exchanges for one hour of Paul's labor. That is Mr. Bray's fundamental axiom.
Let us suppose Peter has 12 hours' labor before him, and Paul only six. Peter will consequently have six hours' labor left over. What will he do with these six hours' labor?
Either he will do nothing with them – in which case he will have worked six hours for nothing; or else he will remain idle for another six hours to get even; or else, as a last resource, he will give these six hours' labor, which he has no use for, to Paul into the bargain.
What in the end will Peter have earned more than Paul? Some hours of labor? No! He will have gained only hours of leisure; he will be forced to play the loafer for six hours. And in order that this new right to loaf might be not only relished but sought after in the new society, this society would have to find in idleness its highest bliss, and to look upon labor as a heavy shackle from which it must break free at all costs.
And indeed, to return to our example, if only these hours of leisure that Peter had gained in excess of Paul were really a gain! Not in the least. Paul, beginning by working only six hours, attains by steady and regular work a result that Peter secures only by beginning with an excess of work. Everyone will want to be Paul, there will be a competition to occupy Paul's position, a competition in idleness.
Well, then! What has the exchange of equal quantities of labor brought us? Overproduction, depreciation, excess of labor followed by unemployment; in short, economic relations such as we see in present-day society, minus the competition of labor.
No! We are wrong! These is still an expedient which may save this new society of Peters and Pauls. Peter will consume by himself the product of the six hours' labor which he has left. But from the moment he has no longer to exchange because he has produced, he has no need to produce for exchange; and the whole hypothesis of a society founded on the exchange and division of labor will fall to the ground. Equality of exchange will have been saved by the simple fact that exchange will have ceased to be: Paul and Peter would arrive at the position of Robinson.
Thus, if all the members of society are supposed to be actual workers, the exchange of equal quantities of hours of labor is possible only on condition that the number of hours to be spent on material production is agreed on before hand. But such an agreement negates individual exchange.
We still come to the same result, if we take as our starting point not the distribution of the products created but the act of production. In large-scale industry, Peter is not free to fix for himself the time of his labor, for Peter's labor is nothing without the co-operation of all the Peters and all the Pauls who make up the workshop. This explains very well the dogged resistance which the English factory owners put up to the ten hours bill . They knew only too well that a two-hours' reduction of labor granted to women and children would carry with it an equal reduction of working hours for adult men. It is in the nature of large-scale industry that working hours should be equal for all. What is today the result of capital and the competition of workers among themselves will be tomorrow, if you sever the relation between labor and capital, an actual agreement based upon the relation between the sum of productive forces and the sum of existing needs.
But such an agreement is a condemnation of individual exchange, and we are back again at our first conclusion!
In principle, there is no exchange of products – but there is the exchange of the labor which co-operated in production. The mode of exchange of products depends upon the mode of exchange of the productive forces. In general, the form of exchange of products corresponds to the form of production. Change the latter, and the former will change in consequence. Thus in the history of society we see that the mode of exchanging products is regulated by the mode of producing them. Individual exchange corresponds also to a definite mode of production which itself corresponds to class antagonism. There is thus no individual exchange without the antagonism of classes.
But the respectable conscience refuses to see this obvious fact. So long as one is a bourgeois, one cannot but see in this relation of antagonism a relation of harmony and eternal justice, which allows no one to gain at the expense of another. For the bourgeois, individual exchange can exist without any antagonism of classes. For him, these are two quite unconnected things. Individual exchange, as the bourgeois conceives it, is far from resembling individual exchange as it actually exists in practice.
Mr. Bray turns the illusion of the respectable bourgeois into an ideal he would like to attain. In a purified individual exchange, freed from all the elements of antagonism he finds in it, he sees an “equalitarian" relation which he would like society to adopt generally.
Mr. Bray does not see that this equalitarian relation, this corrective ideal that he would like to apply to the world, is itself nothing but the reflection of the actual world; and that therefore it is totally impossible to reconstitute society on the basis of what is merely an embellished shadow of it. In proportion as this shadow takes on substance again, we perceive that this substance, far from being the transfiguration dreamt of, is the actual body of existing society.'
here's doc M's toononomic take
meet the exchange economy of peter and paul
"One hour of Peter's labor exchanges for one hour of Paul's labor. That is Mr. Bray's fundamental axiom.
Let us suppose Peter has 12 hours' labor before him, and Paul only six. Peter will consequently have six hours' labor left over. What will he do with these six hours' labor?
Either he will do nothing with them – in which case he will have worked six hours for nothing; or else he will remain idle for another six hours to get even; or else, as a last resource, he will give these six hours' labor, which he has no use for, to Paul into the bargain.
What in the end will Peter have earned more than Paul? Some hours of labor? No! He will have gained only hours of leisure; he will be forced to play the loafer for six hours. And in order that this new right to loaf might be not only relished but sought after in the new society, this society would have to find in idleness its highest bliss, and to look upon labor as a heavy shackle from which it must break free at all costs.
And indeed, to return to our example, if only these hours of leisure that Peter had gained in excess of Paul were really a gain! Not in the least. Paul, beginning by working only six hours, attains by steady and regular work a result that Peter secures only by beginning with an excess of work. Everyone will want to be Paul, there will be a competition to occupy Paul's position, a competition in idleness.
Well, then! What has the exchange of equal quantities of labor brought us? Overproduction, depreciation, excess of labor followed by unemployment; in short, economic relations such as we see in present-day society, minus the competition of labor.
No! We are wrong! These is still an expedient which may save this new society of Peters and Pauls. Peter will consume by himself the product of the six hours' labor which he has left. But from the moment he has no longer to exchange because he has produced, he has no need to produce for exchange; and the whole hypothesis of a society founded on the exchange and division of labor will fall to the ground. Equality of exchange will have been saved by the simple fact that exchange will have ceased to be: Paul and Peter would arrive at the position of Robinson.
Thus, if all the members of society are supposed to be actual workers, the exchange of equal quantities of hours of labor is possible only on condition that the number of hours to be spent on material production is agreed on before hand. But such an agreement negates individual exchange.
We still come to the same result, if we take as our starting point not the distribution of the products created but the act of production. In large-scale industry, Peter is not free to fix for himself the time of his labor, for Peter's labor is nothing without the co-operation of all the Peters and all the Pauls who make up the workshop. This explains very well the dogged resistance which the English factory owners put up to the ten hours bill . They knew only too well that a two-hours' reduction of labor granted to women and children would carry with it an equal reduction of working hours for adult men. It is in the nature of large-scale industry that working hours should be equal for all. What is today the result of capital and the competition of workers among themselves will be tomorrow, if you sever the relation between labor and capital, an actual agreement based upon the relation between the sum of productive forces and the sum of existing needs.
But such an agreement is a condemnation of individual exchange, and we are back again at our first conclusion!
In principle, there is no exchange of products – but there is the exchange of the labor which co-operated in production. The mode of exchange of products depends upon the mode of exchange of the productive forces. In general, the form of exchange of products corresponds to the form of production. Change the latter, and the former will change in consequence. Thus in the history of society we see that the mode of exchanging products is regulated by the mode of producing them. Individual exchange corresponds also to a definite mode of production which itself corresponds to class antagonism. There is thus no individual exchange without the antagonism of classes.
But the respectable conscience refuses to see this obvious fact. So long as one is a bourgeois, one cannot but see in this relation of antagonism a relation of harmony and eternal justice, which allows no one to gain at the expense of another. For the bourgeois, individual exchange can exist without any antagonism of classes. For him, these are two quite unconnected things. Individual exchange, as the bourgeois conceives it, is far from resembling individual exchange as it actually exists in practice.
Mr. Bray turns the illusion of the respectable bourgeois into an ideal he would like to attain. In a purified individual exchange, freed from all the elements of antagonism he finds in it, he sees an “equalitarian" relation which he would like society to adopt generally.
Mr. Bray does not see that this equalitarian relation, this corrective ideal that he would like to apply to the world, is itself nothing but the reflection of the actual world; and that therefore it is totally impossible to reconstitute society on the basis of what is merely an embellished shadow of it. In proportion as this shadow takes on substance again, we perceive that this substance, far from being the transfiguration dreamt of, is the actual body of existing society.'
Sunday, August 28, 2011
karl rove really said this ???
"We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
damn that's good copy
damn that's good copy
many jobbled hobbled by the commodity consumption cult ???
"To all problems we encounter on the road away from trouble and towards satisfaction we seek solutions in shops"
i live with three such spirits
and yes they all three diligently jobbled away 40 h for 50w
over way too many of their precious few and fleeting life-years
to earn the means
to shop and buy
and
to live to shop and buy another day
not sure that gets us one step closer to or farther away from
organizing their millions of ilknesses on the job ....eh ??
i live with three such spirits
and yes they all three diligently jobbled away 40 h for 50w
over way too many of their precious few and fleeting life-years
to earn the means
to shop and buy
and
to live to shop and buy another day
not sure that gets us one step closer to or farther away from
organizing their millions of ilknesses on the job ....eh ??
future theme: modeling corporate expectations as building in a corporate veto
a) credit policy based macronautics is obviously dependent on corporate voluntary compliance
b) tax cuts ???****
c) uncle direct spending ..no
**** borrowing => future tax off sets ???
the recipient of the tax cut might not assume she'll be taxed to service the debt
but if other citizens think they will bare the debt service burden ...
---- this is really free and first iteration thinking time here
no definite results ....yet ---
b) tax cuts ???****
c) uncle direct spending ..no
**** borrowing => future tax off sets ???
the recipient of the tax cut might not assume she'll be taxed to service the debt
but if other citizens think they will bare the debt service burden ...
---- this is really free and first iteration thinking time here
no definite results ....yet ---
nix an open announcement of a higher inflation target
that is really bad mass politics
the people see that as simply a higher cost of living
so what can the fed do to trigger inflationary expectations ??
announce lower interest rate peg like targets
right across the treasury maturity range
no change for 5 years
and buy up 3 trillion in treasury notes and bonds
fund
fanny and freddie
in a program to buy up all underwater mortgages
and make adjustments
restructure the household obligations
by fractioning off the necessary chunk
into a new seperate note and subordinate it to the note issued for the balance
knowing debtors can't be rewarded at tax payer expense
securitize the over hanging hunk
as zero payment low rate internally compounding loans
with a 30 year out one pay balloon
the people see that as simply a higher cost of living
so what can the fed do to trigger inflationary expectations ??
announce lower interest rate peg like targets
right across the treasury maturity range
no change for 5 years
and buy up 3 trillion in treasury notes and bonds
fund
fanny and freddie
in a program to buy up all underwater mortgages
and make adjustments
restructure the household obligations
by fractioning off the necessary chunk
into a new seperate note and subordinate it to the note issued for the balance
knowing debtors can't be rewarded at tax payer expense
securitize the over hanging hunk
as zero payment low rate internally compounding loans
with a 30 year out one pay balloon
stolen form
we do not however propose that the industrial wage workers themselves should increase their consumption,
but allot this function to two great utterly non productive sectors of society
on the one side
the rentiers retainers jurists security aparatchiks sinecurists etc
on the other side the criminals prisoners pan handlers grifters and other lumpen elements
why ? why not incentize wage labors efforts by greater reward ??
well
if the urge for greater expenditure and the ability to satisfy it fully
thru ever less job hours gets united too often in the same direct producing hu-unit
the two processes would doubtless play tricks on each other
and in the long run render the system of exploitation evermore ineffective
as it sank under a surfeited of short hour jobsters
oh "the numberless untapped hours " that would yield
now run that up against this
with the introduction of additional labor saving new machinery
(or what amounts to the same labor saving indirectly with the introduction
of materials saving new machinary )
a mass of formerly employed workers
can be thrown out of employment
ie
a section of the productive population can be rendered redundant;
result ideally :
additional surplus product in the form of wage goods
finds freshly released labour for which it can be exchanged
and without any increase in population
or any need to extend the absolute working-time
-----------------------
so ?
well obviously
to the extent the system goes the new labor saving machines route
it intensifies its contradictions even as it performs its essential historic "mission"
ie it constantly challenges itself to expand effective demand by venturing
whereas the spear barers thives and retainers route expands or at least sustains effective demand
even without "venturing investment "
ie this path only protracts the historic interval of bourgeois domination
but allot this function to two great utterly non productive sectors of society
on the one side
the rentiers retainers jurists security aparatchiks sinecurists etc
on the other side the criminals prisoners pan handlers grifters and other lumpen elements
why ? why not incentize wage labors efforts by greater reward ??
well
if the urge for greater expenditure and the ability to satisfy it fully
thru ever less job hours gets united too often in the same direct producing hu-unit
the two processes would doubtless play tricks on each other
and in the long run render the system of exploitation evermore ineffective
as it sank under a surfeited of short hour jobsters
oh "the numberless untapped hours " that would yield
now run that up against this
with the introduction of additional labor saving new machinery
(or what amounts to the same labor saving indirectly with the introduction
of materials saving new machinary )
a mass of formerly employed workers
can be thrown out of employment
ie
a section of the productive population can be rendered redundant;
result ideally :
additional surplus product in the form of wage goods
finds freshly released labour for which it can be exchanged
and without any increase in population
or any need to extend the absolute working-time
-----------------------
so ?
well obviously
to the extent the system goes the new labor saving machines route
it intensifies its contradictions even as it performs its essential historic "mission"
ie it constantly challenges itself to expand effective demand by venturing
whereas the spear barers thives and retainers route expands or at least sustains effective demand
even without "venturing investment "
ie this path only protracts the historic interval of bourgeois domination
Saturday, August 27, 2011
distinctions clarfied labor capacity...productive use value creating laboring itself and the " suspension of exchange "
"If Ricardo had applied his own principle, the amounts of (simple) labour to which the different labour capacities are reducible, then the matter would have been simple."
" Generally, he is concerned straight away with the hours of labour."
" What the capitalist acquires through exchange is labour capacity: this is the exchange value which he pays for."
" Living labour is the use value which this exchange value has for him,
and out of this use value springs the surplus value..."
---------------------------------------------------------------
undigested final fragment
" ...and the suspension of exchange as such" ????
---------------------------------------------------------
re inserting
"Because Ricardo
" Generally...is concerned straight away with the hours of labour."and " allows exchange with living labour"
" -- and thus falls straight into the production process --"
it remains an insoluble antinomy in his system
that a certain quantity of living labour does not = the commodity which it creates,
in which it objectifies itself,
although the value of the commodity = to the amount of labour contained in it "
" Generally, he is concerned straight away with the hours of labour."
" What the capitalist acquires through exchange is labour capacity: this is the exchange value which he pays for."
" Living labour is the use value which this exchange value has for him,
and out of this use value springs the surplus value..."
---------------------------------------------------------------
undigested final fragment
" ...and the suspension of exchange as such" ????
---------------------------------------------------------
re inserting
"Because Ricardo
" Generally...is concerned straight away with the hours of labour."and " allows exchange with living labour"
" -- and thus falls straight into the production process --"
it remains an insoluble antinomy in his system
that a certain quantity of living labour does not = the commodity which it creates,
in which it objectifies itself,
although the value of the commodity = to the amount of labour contained in it "
"this equalitarian relation, this corrective ideal we might like to apply to the world, is itself nothing but the reflection of the actual world; and it is therefore totally impossible to reconstitute society on the basis of what is merely an embellished shadow of it. In proportion as this shadow takes on substance again, we perceive that this substance, far from being the transfiguration dreamt of, is the actual body of existing society"
lost output
every quarter spent below the 1.00 line :
how much in aggregate ??
my guess enough to repair the national interstate road system
or build a new national hi tech electric grid or convert all coal fired electric generators to gas
or retro fit to zero emissions
every chemical plant's pollution stack east of the ohio and north of the potomac
every chemical plant's pollution stack east of the ohio and north of the potomac
uhmmm
maybe we better throw in a few ands there
maybe we better throw in a few ands there
for good measure just to make weight
greenwald -stigiltz relabeled
conjecture
G-S can be re thought as a model of corporate opportunity
for additional gain extraction equal to the pareto individual welfare neutral tax and subsidy
imagine each corporation as a little G-S system where the holdings of households are
their total marketed human capital only
the corporation improves some extracts some at a minimum leaves the employee indifferent between a job and some direct product selling ie between selling themselves and selling their product
even minimum gains to households would allow these hierarchical systems ie corporations to thrive
of course the world would be constantly discovering new opportunities where substituting hierarchy with inter employee transfers etc coinicide with an emergent net gain that becomes the well of net revenue for the corporation
G-S can be re thought as a model of corporate opportunity
for additional gain extraction equal to the pareto individual welfare neutral tax and subsidy
imagine each corporation as a little G-S system where the holdings of households are
their total marketed human capital only
the corporation improves some extracts some at a minimum leaves the employee indifferent between a job and some direct product selling ie between selling themselves and selling their product
even minimum gains to households would allow these hierarchical systems ie corporations to thrive
of course the world would be constantly discovering new opportunities where substituting hierarchy with inter employee transfers etc coinicide with an emergent net gain that becomes the well of net revenue for the corporation
Friday, August 26, 2011
Share of Gross Domestic Product of Net Exports, 1992-2011
1992 (- 0.5)
1993 (- 1.0) Clinton
1994 (- 1.3)
1995 (- 1.2)
1996 (- 1.2)
1997 (- 1.2)
1998 (- 1.8)
1999 (- 2.8)
2000 (- 3.8)
2001 (- 3.6) Bush
2002 (- 4.0)
2003 (- 4.5)
2004 (- 5.2)
2005 (- 5.7)
2006 (- 5.8)
2007 (- 5.1)
2008 (- 5.0)
2009 (- 2.8) Obama
2010 (- 3.6)
2011
Qtr1 (- 3.8)
Qtr2 (- 4.0
1992 (- 0.5)
1993 (- 1.0) Clinton
1994 (- 1.3)
1995 (- 1.2)
1996 (- 1.2)
1997 (- 1.2)
1998 (- 1.8)
1999 (- 2.8)
2000 (- 3.8)
2001 (- 3.6) Bush
2002 (- 4.0)
2003 (- 4.5)
2004 (- 5.2)
2005 (- 5.7)
2006 (- 5.8)
2007 (- 5.1)
2008 (- 5.0)
2009 (- 2.8) Obama
2010 (- 3.6)
2011
Qtr1 (- 3.8)
Qtr2 (- 4.0
peak pruning
now is the surplus of our discontent
the transfer system will not be hacked to flinders
but a nice body of left-pwog types prolly agree with my pen pal mike whitney :
"The debt crisis is a PR scam designed to foreclose on Progressive Era reforms that lifted working people from squalor and provided them with a decent living. Now those policies are under-fire from financial elites who want to turn back the clock, crush the middle class, and return us all to the Dark Ages."
the transfer system will not be hacked to flinders
but a nice body of left-pwog types prolly agree with my pen pal mike whitney :
"The debt crisis is a PR scam designed to foreclose on Progressive Era reforms that lifted working people from squalor and provided them with a decent living. Now those policies are under-fire from financial elites who want to turn back the clock, crush the middle class, and return us all to the Dark Ages."
Thursday, August 25, 2011
model versus model
in the models
the play is hiding behind y
what's the break out of change thru time
between p change and q change
over say 10-12 quarters
guys like ned phelps want us to believe
firms will rationally convert nearly all pulses
of policy induced additional ED
into price changes
leaving q un influenced
and rendering fiscal thrust impotent
as impotent as the unacknowledged
liquidity trap renders solvent firm directed credit policy
at the model level
this is and always will be possible
since in the end firms are free to price and produce
as they wish
and their choices
can be assumed into nearly any form desired
you simply work back from the conclusion u want
making it all seem as plausible as ambiguous labeling can make
now if we have disinflation under way
suddenly firms can react by cutting q
not p
this again can be modeled nicely
and blamed on greedy stubborn ignorant wage earners
'nother application 'nother set of assumptions
---
what mr hicks did in 37
was build a little model
that freezes the price system
taking it out of the possible outcomes set
of course he has to freeze relative prices
since y is a composition product
but also he freezes the absolute price level
in a sense we exist in an eternal present moment
all he added to keynes cross was
the pseudo realism of the interest rate
--there by letting money
conceptually out of the liquidity trap ---
yes by adding the r dimension to the y dimension
hicks gave us a way to get firms net spending
into the show
without recourse to an acceleration principle
but still and all at the micro level
we still had both a p and q set of vectors ...
plus a set of future "periods"
as we do in reality
but there is plenty of counter moves and other logic boxes
many logically sound ways
exist to get back to FE fast
so why the jousting
just pick a class side and gather up the relevent cudgels
why buy into
all of this model versus model war fare??
isn't it silly thru the looking glass exercising ??
trying to provide a iron clad escape proof set of hand cuffs for your chosen black hat side
t'is a will 'o the wisp
after all
what else do you think guys like barro and phelps and krooooooooogman are up to ??
besides allegorical combat
dueling logic boxes
now i agrre
its wonderous to see the likes of
square wheel barro and dogdish bagwhatme
make such patent clown romps
out of their apologia
for in one case the present contrived and maintained north hemi stag and in the other
the four decade long de industrialization of america
but isn't it too much to ask anymore of them then that ??
isn't it sadistic of us to demand
they start crying out on network TV
"i surrender mr kroogman you pinned me
i give up ...yes you are right...my line is pure
rocky mountain dew ...yes i'm a lying craven
corporate barking beagle...yes i take money from the korporate klavern kids ... yes i deserve to be hung from a lamp post "
be satisfied to watch their prat falls
guys like greg mankiw and marty feldstein
--the buggars--
are too cautious and sneaky to provide us so much entertainment
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
what happens when you don't get the a full enough picture ... exhibit paul k
"Why do bad ideas flourish in policy discourse, even though a few minutes of thought and research would show just how bad they are?
Why do they often become not just widely accepted but absolute orthodoxy, the things you have to believe in order to be a Very Serious Person?
I don’t have a full answer; self-interest is part of it but not, I think, the whole story"
"
if he'd stopped there ..but he doesn't
".. some bad ideas — like expansionary austerity — hurt even most of the elite."
by that he turns the human condition in all its complexity and contradictions
into a tragedy of willful ignorance pig headedness bloody mindedness etc etc
well not if it repeats itself over and over again
if indeed this looks to be all to obviously
1937 all over again
i'd search out the cui bono crowd
and see if they aren't well ...the decisive interest
the elite within the elite
Why do they often become not just widely accepted but absolute orthodoxy, the things you have to believe in order to be a Very Serious Person?
I don’t have a full answer; self-interest is part of it but not, I think, the whole story"
"
if he'd stopped there ..but he doesn't
".. some bad ideas — like expansionary austerity — hurt even most of the elite."
by that he turns the human condition in all its complexity and contradictions
into a tragedy of willful ignorance pig headedness bloody mindedness etc etc
well not if it repeats itself over and over again
if indeed this looks to be all to obviously
1937 all over again
i'd search out the cui bono crowd
and see if they aren't well ...the decisive interest
the elite within the elite
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
b4 one lets in asian built skill heads .....
Number of adults with at least a bachelor’s degree
by age group
ad if you ask the right question
ala the BLS
What training and what skills will be necessary
" full paper (Neumark et al, 2011) shows that if we project skill demands based on BLS skill requirements, we project massive oversupply of skilled workers"
yes you can probably
take that buried finding to the local ATM
over training is a luxury good
core Democrats
---backed by the academic lobby and massive donor base --
still try to push on the ass hole innocent
electorate/citizen tax base
the too many too few controversy
is of course contrived on the too few side
with cries of massive shortgages
aided and abeted by the corporate high tech lobby
nothin like a big entry quota of cheap foreign skill heads
to control "human resource costs "
firms employ folks with excess skills every day
not just the skills the job requires
the corporations hire for excess often as not
they hire the skill sets they find
not those they need
most employees are wildly over qualified
as to skills socially needed
demand them and they will emerge
look at what happens in a real skill shortage
like during
the arsenal of democracy boom
by age group
Table 1. Estimated and projected supply and demand for workers
by educational attainment, 2018
by educational attainment, 2018
ad if you ask the right question
ala the BLS
What training and what skills will be necessary
" full paper (Neumark et al, 2011) shows that if we project skill demands based on BLS skill requirements, we project massive oversupply of skilled workers"
yes you can probably
take that buried finding to the local ATM
over training is a luxury good
core Democrats
---backed by the academic lobby and massive donor base --
still try to push on the ass hole innocent
electorate/citizen tax base
the too many too few controversy
is of course contrived on the too few side
with cries of massive shortgages
aided and abeted by the corporate high tech lobby
nothin like a big entry quota of cheap foreign skill heads
to control "human resource costs "
firms employ folks with excess skills every day
not just the skills the job requires
the corporations hire for excess often as not
they hire the skill sets they find
not those they need
most employees are wildly over qualified
as to skills socially needed
demand them and they will emerge
look at what happens in a real skill shortage
like during
the arsenal of democracy boom
Monday, August 22, 2011
LDC rebel states... the color free little Revolutions... as liberation roads
peoples' states like Eritrea Nepal
can they find an independent development fast track ???
how does a small fry state play off
the great game players
can the big players rivalry create little imp leverage ???
can they find an independent development fast track ???
how does a small fry state play off
the great game players
can the big players rivalry create little imp leverage ???
in US ... no law requiring companies to reveal publicly where their employees are based.
but
corporations " are required by law to report the numbers to the Commerce Department, "
C-DEP " compiles a yearly report on total employment by U.S. multinationals"
"multinationals cut 2.9 million jobs in the United States and added 2.4 million overseas between 2000 and 2009."
"about 46 percent of GE’s 287,000 employees worked in the United States, compared with 54 percent in 2000"
GE the company with a famous former ceo
that wanted his corporate " production junk " on inter oceanic barges
" IBM stopped giving its U.S. head count in 2009......
Data from before 2009 showed IBM rapidly shifting workers to India.....estimate ....2009 also marked
the first time the company had more employees
in India than the United States"
" .P & G .... The number of U.S. employees is 35,000 out of 127,000 total, or 28 percent"
corporations " are required by law to report the numbers to the Commerce Department, "
C-DEP " compiles a yearly report on total employment by U.S. multinationals"
"multinationals cut 2.9 million jobs in the United States and added 2.4 million overseas between 2000 and 2009."
"about 46 percent of GE’s 287,000 employees worked in the United States, compared with 54 percent in 2000"
GE the company with a famous former ceo
that wanted his corporate " production junk " on inter oceanic barges
" IBM stopped giving its U.S. head count in 2009......
Data from before 2009 showed IBM rapidly shifting workers to India.....estimate ....2009 also marked
the first time the company had more employees
in India than the United States"
" .P & G .... The number of U.S. employees is 35,000 out of 127,000 total, or 28 percent"
Sunday, August 21, 2011
embrace the cheat
when designing a system welcome the cheats
they'll alow you to discover the implications of your mechanism more quickly
cheats of course can over whelm a system
and enforcement can cost too much
but i think of gosplan I
the zillion tales of cheating that evoked
if we attend to them carefully
can teach us all we need know
to build
gosplan II
----------------
not to mention the opportunity for show trails
they'll alow you to discover the implications of your mechanism more quickly
cheats of course can over whelm a system
and enforcement can cost too much
but i think of gosplan I
the zillion tales of cheating that evoked
if we attend to them carefully
can teach us all we need know
to build
gosplan II
----------------
not to mention the opportunity for show trails
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Friday, August 19, 2011
China is doing a lot more to control the supply of money than the cost of money
or so sez jp morgan .....and rightly so
its a quantity rationing process after all
like gaining admissions to princeton's freshman class
no matter what hocus pocus interets rates no more ration credit size and availibility
then tuition rations admission to old nassau's hallowed corridors
its a quantity rationing process after all
like gaining admissions to princeton's freshman class
no matter what hocus pocus interets rates no more ration credit size and availibility
then tuition rations admission to old nassau's hallowed corridors
pk works the euro zone nations are like US states analogy
"relatively good news coming out of Germany should be viewed as a regional development within a larger economy, and that Germany — as Europe’s center of durable goods manufacturing — bore some resemblance to the industrial midwest, which was also experiencing a bounceback as manufacturing revived.
.....Now there are signs that this expansion is faltering — but so is expansion in Germany."
too bad he didn't look at this in a longer perspective
germany versus the mid west from say 1947 to today
that would indeed enlighten us eh ??
.....Now there are signs that this expansion is faltering — but so is expansion in Germany."
too bad he didn't look at this in a longer perspective
germany versus the mid west from say 1947 to today
that would indeed enlighten us eh ??
the party of exclusion and the party of inclusion
thesis
that's all u need to con the jobshackled masses
that's all u need to con the jobshackled masses
axiom of choice: comes a time only more customers will due the trick ... just more easy credit won't
corporations can't resist a customer with cash in her hand
public transfer systems that flood borrowed funds
to credit constrained spending units
can induce corporations one by one
despite their collective prudence
their "will to resist" expansion
to ... in fact expand
no pub can't get firms to borrow
simply by lowering rates and standards
not even by pumping in cash... yup tax credits
simply get banked away
but a cash customer unsatisfied doesn't go home
and put her cash under the mattress
she goes elsewhere to the rival ass hole outfit
to spend her money
and recall all corporations are any corporation's rival
if they're not in the same bank centered cartel
once inventory is run down
new orders must be made
and plants must fill the new orders with new production
enough cash customers enough orders production capacity moves back toward full use
and firms begin to add new capacity and new "hands and heads "
bingo
----------------------
normally the firms in aggregate are credit constrained
they would borrow more and be able to repay it if the potential credit rations were unlimited
the fed sees to it they are limited
but what happens when the credit constrained aggregate suddenly isn't constrained
because the aggragate of sound borrowers has a sufficiency of credit already ???
the fed soon discovers unlike normal times
the central bank
no longer can control the production systems rate of production
public transfer systems that flood borrowed funds
to credit constrained spending units
can induce corporations one by one
despite their collective prudence
their "will to resist" expansion
to ... in fact expand
no pub can't get firms to borrow
simply by lowering rates and standards
not even by pumping in cash... yup tax credits
simply get banked away
but a cash customer unsatisfied doesn't go home
and put her cash under the mattress
she goes elsewhere to the rival ass hole outfit
to spend her money
and recall all corporations are any corporation's rival
if they're not in the same bank centered cartel
once inventory is run down
new orders must be made
and plants must fill the new orders with new production
enough cash customers enough orders production capacity moves back toward full use
and firms begin to add new capacity and new "hands and heads "
bingo
----------------------
normally the firms in aggregate are credit constrained
they would borrow more and be able to repay it if the potential credit rations were unlimited
the fed sees to it they are limited
but what happens when the credit constrained aggregate suddenly isn't constrained
because the aggragate of sound borrowers has a sufficiency of credit already ???
the fed soon discovers unlike normal times
the central bank
no longer can control the production systems rate of production
highways have interchanges... there is no neural analogue for this
but then axons are 3D
stacking lanes would help eh ???
Thursday, August 18, 2011
egg rate drops on decade long trend line
birthed firms create jobs just as murdered firms kill em
but the birth rate is slowing
and look at the murder rate in 5 years half killed
in 17 three quaters killed
ah its a rough existence
short and brutish
for most firms trying to make a living of a market or three
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
fifty years sooner or fifty years later measured on a world scale this is a minor point
VI
world scale basic unit :
100 years
world scale basic unit :
100 years
ponder over your fermented winking bowl of cheer
"The Roman proletarian lived at the expense of society "
Modern society lives at the expense of the modern proletarian. "
"Marx specially stressed this profound observation of Sismondi"
"Corporate Imperialism somewhat changes the situation.
A privileged upper stratum of the proletariat in the imperialist countries
lives partly at the expense of hundreds of millions in the uncivilised nations. "
Modern society lives at the expense of the modern proletarian. "
"Marx specially stressed this profound observation of Sismondi"
"Corporate Imperialism somewhat changes the situation.
A privileged upper stratum of the proletariat in the imperialist countries
lives partly at the expense of hundreds of millions in the uncivilised nations. "
V I 's view of corporate imperialism
"export of capital is parasitism raised to a high pitch"
"finance capital strives for domination, not freedom "
".Political reaction all along the line is a characteristic feature of imperialism"
"finance capital strives for domination, not freedom "
".Political reaction all along the line is a characteristic feature of imperialism"
u can never shake too much krugman into your soup
latest eye deep sum up:
"It really is a race between America and Europe: who can make the worst of a bad situation. And both competitors are giving it their all."
the competition is to see who can rebalance fastest of course germany has no serious regional cluster of states as a counter part here
at least that i can locate ..but what the fuck do i know
i'm a big picture qualitative look
type of hair pin
"It really is a race between America and Europe: who can make the worst of a bad situation. And both competitors are giving it their all."
the competition is to see who can rebalance fastest of course germany has no serious regional cluster of states as a counter part here
at least that i can locate ..but what the fuck do i know
i'm a big picture qualitative look
type of hair pin
nothing prevents.....
the state borrowing at one rate a higher rate and lending to the production platform at another rate
even sillier then deficit and debt ratios is uncle with a case of interest rate sensitivity
after all a zero real rate loan or a negative real rate loan
with a tight term is all the state needs to insure highest use real investing by units
with a fair and broad horizon
even sillier then deficit and debt ratios is uncle with a case of interest rate sensitivity
after all a zero real rate loan or a negative real rate loan
with a tight term is all the state needs to insure highest use real investing by units
with a fair and broad horizon
answer to an MMT er
"Why issue bonds at all ???
It is time to take back our constitutional right to print our own money ... that's right! ... print our own money NOT borrow it ..."
It is time to take back our constitutional right to print our own money ... that's right! ... print our own money NOT borrow it ..."
the fed does that already ...every trading day more or less
are you suggesting congress order the fed
--its creature ultimately and not protected by the supremes ---
to buy up more of uncles outstanding debt ??
that's been tried in the hundreds of billions
are you suggesting the fed go for trillions ??
okay why not
and thru fanny and fred
buy up the household morgages too
why not
but that set of actions and all the "liquidity" it would create still needs
a household income suplement and pri sec jobs induction program
o complete itself
ie to produce a rapid recovery here
and given all the cash out there already
we can do the second part
get the recovery
strictly on borrowed funds alone
without fed monetization
without the fed going on a buying spree
the problem with MMT enthusiasts
they want to implement their gimmick so badly
they can't wait till its relevent
oddly enough
paul krugman is preparing us wambats of the meme out back
to pre empt that righteous recommendation at the very moment it becomes paramount
ie
"when the system restores credit traction"
yes the magic moment when MMT
could liberate us from mere hicksianism
during times like say 1979
stagflation times
when we could have gone much farther much faster
restored full employment and blasted ahead fearlessly
we could have avoided the stupid volcker dammerung
and stockton's economic dunkirk bull crap
and cried
"to hell with the bond vigilantes
full speed ahead "
inflation
bring it on
time we cured that institutionally once and for all
Monday, August 15, 2011
as we look towards november 2012
" Nothing in our times can be done without elections; nothing can be done without the masses. And in this era of the broadcast media and the internet it is impossible to gain the following of the masses without a widely ramified, systematically managed, well-equipped system of flattery, lies, fraud, juggling with fashionable and popular catchwords, and promising all manner of reforms and blessings to the workers right and left'
'as long as they renounce the revolutionary struggle for the overthrow of bourgeoisie."
'as long as they renounce the revolutionary struggle for the overthrow of bourgeoisie."
trade union membership limits ..not even the majority of a nation's proles ???
". No one can seriously think it possible to organise the majority of the proletariat under capitalism. "
" the (economic) partition of the world by the international cartels has begun. "
1916
"There are already over one hundred such international cartels, which command the entire world market and divide it “amicably” among themselves—until war redivides it. "
"The export of capital, as distinct from the export of commodities under non-monopoly capitalism, is a highly characteristic phenomenon and is closely linked with the economic and territorial-political partition of the world; "
" the territorial partition of the world is completed. "
since then ???
is the cartel process completeable like the territorial partitions by 1916 ??
such that all cartel partitionings become re partitionings ???
but
" decay is characteristic of every monopoly under the system of private ownership of the means of production"
ie cartels come and go so re partitioning abounds far more frequent then states re partition territory
1916
"There are already over one hundred such international cartels, which command the entire world market and divide it “amicably” among themselves—until war redivides it. "
"The export of capital, as distinct from the export of commodities under non-monopoly capitalism, is a highly characteristic phenomenon and is closely linked with the economic and territorial-political partition of the world; "
" the territorial partition of the world is completed. "
since then ???
is the cartel process completeable like the territorial partitions by 1916 ??
such that all cartel partitionings become re partitionings ???
but
" decay is characteristic of every monopoly under the system of private ownership of the means of production"
ie cartels come and go so re partitioning abounds far more frequent then states re partition territory
NB fallacy of label
how can we ever exceed production platform capacity ??
the usual answer certain production levels are... unsustainable
that becomes the label that hides the secrets
just what is not sustainable about this "surplus " production
we are using up resources and factors faster then we can replace them ???
hmmmm
concrete examples please
sure we'd hit bottle necks but hey that's what price rationing is for
and yes the composition of output might change
but the production indexbased level of ouput
ie
any chained bundle of products chosen can't be sustained
really ???
not to notice we are talking here of a national production platform
operating in a chronically slack global production system
the usual answer certain production levels are... unsustainable
that becomes the label that hides the secrets
just what is not sustainable about this "surplus " production
we are using up resources and factors faster then we can replace them ???
hmmmm
concrete examples please
sure we'd hit bottle necks but hey that's what price rationing is for
and yes the composition of output might change
but the production indexbased level of ouput
ie
any chained bundle of products chosen can't be sustained
really ???
not to notice we are talking here of a national production platform
operating in a chronically slack global production system
christy makes a point
" World War II.... nearly 10 million men of prime working age were drafted into the military, there was a huge skills gap between the jobs that needed to be done on the home front and the remaining work force. Yet businesses and workers found a way to get the job done. Factories simplified production methods and housewives learned to rivet."
"... demand is crucial ... jobs don’t go unfilled for long. If jobs were widely available today,
unemployed workers would quickly find a way to acquire needed skills
or move to where the jobs were located."
eaxactly madame exactly
"... demand is crucial ... jobs don’t go unfilled for long. If jobs were widely available today,
unemployed workers would quickly find a way to acquire needed skills
or move to where the jobs were located."
eaxactly madame exactly
gallant sir PK and the mmt windmills: "financeability matters too, even with fiat money"
"Let’s have a more or less concrete example.
Suppose that at some future date — a date at which private demand for funds has revived, so that there are lending opportunities —
the US government has committed itself to spending equal to 27 percent of GDP,
while the tax laws only lead to 17 percent of GDP in revenues.
consider what happens in that case under two scenarios.
In the first
, investors believe that the government will eventually raise revenue and/or cut spending,
and are willing to lend enough to cover the deficit.
In the second,
for whatever reason, investors refuse to buy US bonds.
The second case poses no problem, say the MMTers, or at least no worse problem than the first
: the US government can simply issue money, crediting it to banks, to pay its bills.
But what happens next?
We’re assuming that there are lending opportunities out there,
so the banks won’t leave their newly acquired reserves sitting idle;
they’ll convert them into currency, which they lend to individuals.
So the government indeed ends up financing itself by printing money,
getting the private sector to accept pieces of green paper in return for goods and services.
And I think the MMTers agree that this would lead to inflation;
I’m not clear on whether they realize that a deficit financed by money issue
is more inflationary than a deficit financed by bond issue.
For it is.
And in my hypothetical example, it would be quite likely that the money-financed deficit
would lead to hyperinflation.
The point is that there are limits to the amount of real resources that you can extract through seigniorage.
When people expect inflation, they become reluctant to hold cash,
which drive prices up and means that the government has to print more money to extract a given amount of real resources, which means higher inflation, etc..
Do the math, and it becomes clear that any attempt to extract too much from seigniorage
— more than a few percent of GDP, probably —
leads to an infinite upward spiral in inflation.
In effect, the currency is destroyed.
This would not happen, even with the same deficit, if the government can still sell bonds.
The point is that under normal, non-liquidity-trap conditions,
the direct effects of the deficit on aggregate demand are by no means the whole story
it matters whether the government can issue bonds or has to rely on the printing press.
And while it may literally be true that a government with its own currency
can’t go bankrupt, it can destroy that currency if it loses fiscal credibility.
Now, I am not predicting hyperinflation for the US
— I am not Peter Schiff!
Most of our current deficit is cyclical, and even in the long run a modest return of political rationality would make the budget issue eminently solvable.
But the MMT people are just wrong in believing that
the only question you need to ask about the budget deficit
is
whether it supplies the right amount of aggregate demand;
financeability matters too, even with fiat money.
Suppose that at some future date — a date at which private demand for funds has revived, so that there are lending opportunities —
the US government has committed itself to spending equal to 27 percent of GDP,
while the tax laws only lead to 17 percent of GDP in revenues.
consider what happens in that case under two scenarios.
In the first
, investors believe that the government will eventually raise revenue and/or cut spending,
and are willing to lend enough to cover the deficit.
In the second,
for whatever reason, investors refuse to buy US bonds.
The second case poses no problem, say the MMTers, or at least no worse problem than the first
: the US government can simply issue money, crediting it to banks, to pay its bills.
But what happens next?
We’re assuming that there are lending opportunities out there,
so the banks won’t leave their newly acquired reserves sitting idle;
they’ll convert them into currency, which they lend to individuals.
So the government indeed ends up financing itself by printing money,
getting the private sector to accept pieces of green paper in return for goods and services.
And I think the MMTers agree that this would lead to inflation;
I’m not clear on whether they realize that a deficit financed by money issue
is more inflationary than a deficit financed by bond issue.
For it is.
And in my hypothetical example, it would be quite likely that the money-financed deficit
would lead to hyperinflation.
The point is that there are limits to the amount of real resources that you can extract through seigniorage.
When people expect inflation, they become reluctant to hold cash,
which drive prices up and means that the government has to print more money to extract a given amount of real resources, which means higher inflation, etc..
Do the math, and it becomes clear that any attempt to extract too much from seigniorage
— more than a few percent of GDP, probably —
leads to an infinite upward spiral in inflation.
In effect, the currency is destroyed.
This would not happen, even with the same deficit, if the government can still sell bonds.
The point is that under normal, non-liquidity-trap conditions,
the direct effects of the deficit on aggregate demand are by no means the whole story
it matters whether the government can issue bonds or has to rely on the printing press.
And while it may literally be true that a government with its own currency
can’t go bankrupt, it can destroy that currency if it loses fiscal credibility.
Now, I am not predicting hyperinflation for the US
— I am not Peter Schiff!
Most of our current deficit is cyclical, and even in the long run a modest return of political rationality would make the budget issue eminently solvable.
But the MMT people are just wrong in believing that
the only question you need to ask about the budget deficit
is
whether it supplies the right amount of aggregate demand;
financeability matters too, even with fiat money.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
reminder: not re distribnution of wealth ....free distribution of wealth
the notion of redistribution suggests the wrong source
the dollar equivalent of a producers marginal/incremental product
--as properly defined and calculated ---
may belong to that producer
but hardly theequivalent of the total product
the producers surplus belongs to society
the sunk costs of technology deserve their rightful appropriation
as the surplus of co operation does
and nature's bounty
in as much as society has produced it
what is the value of certain hours of production
the social dividend earned or unearned
oughta come out of the producers surplus
in fact oughta be all of the producers surplus
what is the value of a soft ware analyst's timte on a desert island
the dollar equivalent of a producers marginal/incremental product
--as properly defined and calculated ---
may belong to that producer
but hardly theequivalent of the total product
the producers surplus belongs to society
the sunk costs of technology deserve their rightful appropriation
as the surplus of co operation does
and nature's bounty
in as much as society has produced it
what is the value of certain hours of production
the social dividend earned or unearned
oughta come out of the producers surplus
in fact oughta be all of the producers surplus
what is the value of a soft ware analyst's timte on a desert island
Thursday, August 11, 2011
dah tip ah dah ice boig
" we won’t always be in a liquidity trap. Someday private demand will be high enough that the Fed will have good reason to raise interest rates above zero, to limit inflation. And when that happens, deficits — and the perceived willingness of the government to raise enough revenue to cover its spending — will matter"
paul q kigman
paul q kigman
with all this talk of stateless elites ..a corrective demarcation
".. if it is impossible. to toy in rude, simple fashion with the dream of a straightforward retreat from imperialism to “peaceful” capitalism, why not let these dreams, take the form of innocent speculation on “peaceful” “ultra-imperialism”? "
" Why not try to escape the acute problems that have been and are being posed by the present epoch of imperialism by dreaming up the possibility of it soon passing away and being followed by a relatively “peaceful” epoch of “ultra-imperialism” that will not require any “abrupt” tactics? "
" There is no doubt that the trend of development is towards a single world trust absorbing all enterprises without exception and all states without exception"
But
" this development proceeds in such circumstances, at such a pace, through such contradictions, conflicts and upheavals—not only economic but political, national, etc.—
that inevitably imperialism will burst and capitalism will be transformed into its opposite
long before one world trust materialises,
before the “ultra-imperialist”, world-wide amalgamation of national finance capitals takes place. "
" Why not try to escape the acute problems that have been and are being posed by the present epoch of imperialism by dreaming up the possibility of it soon passing away and being followed by a relatively “peaceful” epoch of “ultra-imperialism” that will not require any “abrupt” tactics? "
" There is no doubt that the trend of development is towards a single world trust absorbing all enterprises without exception and all states without exception"
But
" this development proceeds in such circumstances, at such a pace, through such contradictions, conflicts and upheavals—not only economic but political, national, etc.—
that inevitably imperialism will burst and capitalism will be transformed into its opposite
long before one world trust materialises,
before the “ultra-imperialist”, world-wide amalgamation of national finance capitals takes place. "
V. Ilyin
--redaction warning ---
--redaction warning ---
who from sheer stupidity or spinelessness drifts with the streams ??
this apropos
the wage class white yankees
given the push me- pull me ...tar baby ..sand trap
political antinomies of our white nation's post X-man kultur
how can struggle and class clash sharpen the unit perceptrons sufficiently to escape
these socially internalized meme-processing snares ??
creating a minds immediate 3D neighborhood social reality
as ontically class cloven mayhaps ??
the wage class white yankees
given the push me- pull me ...tar baby ..sand trap
political antinomies of our white nation's post X-man kultur
how can struggle and class clash sharpen the unit perceptrons sufficiently to escape
these socially internalized meme-processing snares ??
creating a minds immediate 3D neighborhood social reality
as ontically class cloven mayhaps ??
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
hide the real value added
where the real value is added on a multi sourced product is hard to determine
particularly if much of the transacting is non arms length and internal to one outfit
findings of fact ???
"The fact that the overall import content of U.S. consumer goods has remained relatively constant while the Chinese share has doubled indicates that Chinese gains have come, in large part, at the expense of other exporting nations"
" it does not seem that so far Chinese exporters are fully passing through their domestic inflation. In May 2011, prices of Chinese imports only increased 2.8% from May 2010. "
in this light
if we had a serious rmb reval ???
maybe so what no import tsunami
" of the 11.5% of U.S. consumer spending that goes for goods and services produced abroad, 7.3% reflects the cost of imports. The remaining 4.2% goes for U.S. transportation, wholesale, and retail activities. Thus, 36% of the price U.S. consumers pay for imported goods actually goes to U.S. companies and workers."
waving it off :???
"When total import content is considered, 13.9% of U.S. consumer spending can be traced to the cost of imported goods and services. This is substantially higher than the 7.3%,
wave off II:
". Imported oil, which makes up a large part of the production costs of the “gasoline, fuel oil, and other energy goods” and “transportation” categories, is the main contributor to this 6.6 percentage point difference."
but how about chinese content ???
"The total share of PCE that goes for goods and services imported from China is 1.9%. This is 0.7 percentage point more than the share of Chinese-produced final goods and services in PCE. "
****PCE = personal; consumption expenditures
"The fraction of import content attributable to Chinese imports has doubled over the past decade"
"a large share of Chinese production costs consists of imports from other countries.
. In 2009, it cost about $179 in China to produce an iPhone, which sold in the United States for about $500.
Thus, $179 of the U.S. retail cost consisted of Chinese imported content.
However, only $6.50 was actually due to assembly costs in China.
The other $172.50 reflected costs of parts produced in other countries,
including $10.75 for parts made in the United States."
no parts made in china ???
more detail ...
"chinese Import content of U.S. personal consumption expenditures by category"
" it does not seem that so far Chinese exporters are fully passing through their domestic inflation. In May 2011, prices of Chinese imports only increased 2.8% from May 2010. "
in this light
if we had a serious rmb reval ???
maybe so what no import tsunami
" of the 11.5% of U.S. consumer spending that goes for goods and services produced abroad, 7.3% reflects the cost of imports. The remaining 4.2% goes for U.S. transportation, wholesale, and retail activities. Thus, 36% of the price U.S. consumers pay for imported goods actually goes to U.S. companies and workers."
"This U.S. fraction is much higher for imports from China." !!!!!!
" Whereas goods labeled “Made in China” make up 2.7% of U.S. consumer spending, only 1.2% actually reflects the cost of the imported goods. Thus, on average, of every dollar spent on an item labeled “Made in China,” 55 cents go for services produced in the United States. In other words, the U.S. content of “Made in China” is about 55%."
waving it off :???
" The fact that the U.S. content of Chinese goods is much higher than for imports as a whole is mainly due to higher retail and wholesale margins on consumer electronics and clothing than on most other goods and services"36% vs 55% hmmmmm
"When total import content is considered, 13.9% of U.S. consumer spending can be traced to the cost of imported goods and services. This is substantially higher than the 7.3%,
wave off II:
". Imported oil, which makes up a large part of the production costs of the “gasoline, fuel oil, and other energy goods” and “transportation” categories, is the main contributor to this 6.6 percentage point difference."
but how about chinese content ???
"The total share of PCE that goes for goods and services imported from China is 1.9%. This is 0.7 percentage point more than the share of Chinese-produced final goods and services in PCE. "
****PCE = personal; consumption expenditures
"The fraction of import content attributable to Chinese imports has doubled over the past decade"
"a large share of Chinese production costs consists of imports from other countries.
. In 2009, it cost about $179 in China to produce an iPhone, which sold in the United States for about $500.
Thus, $179 of the U.S. retail cost consisted of Chinese imported content.
However, only $6.50 was actually due to assembly costs in China.
The other $172.50 reflected costs of parts produced in other countries,
including $10.75 for parts made in the United States."
no parts made in china ???
more detail ...
"chinese Import content of U.S. personal consumption expenditures by category"
Chinese goods account for 2.7% of U.S. PCE, about one-quarter of the 11.5% foreign share. .
Local content of “Made in China”
Obviously, if a pair of sneakers made in China costs $70 in the United States, not all of that retail price goes to the Chinese manufacturer. In fact, the bulk of the retail price pays for transportation of the sneakers in the United States, rent for the store where they are sold, profits for shareholders of the U.S. retailer, and the cost of marketing the sneakers. These costs include the salaries, wages, and benefits paid to the U.S. workers and managers who staff these operations.
Table 1 shows that, of the 11.5% of U.S. consumer spending that goes for goods and services produced abroad, 7.3% reflects the cost of imports. The remaining 4.2% goes for U.S. transportation, wholesale, and retail activities. Thus, 36% of the price U.S. consumers pay for imported goods actually goes to U.S. companies and workers.
This U.S. fraction is much higher for imports from China. Whereas goods labeled “Made in China” make up 2.7% of U.S. consumer spending, only 1.2% actually reflects the cost of the imported goods. Thus, on average, of every dollar spent on an item labeled “Made in China,” 55 cents go for services produced in the United States. In other words, the U.S. content of “Made in China” is about 55%. The fact that the U.S. content of Chinese goods is much higher than for imports as a whole is mainly due to higher retail and wholesale margins on consumer electronics and clothing than on most other goods and services.
Total import content of U.S. PCE
Not all goods and services imported into the United States are directly sold to households. Many are used in the production of goods and services in the United States. Hence, part of the 88.5% of spending on goods and services labeled “Made in the USA” pays for imported intermediate goods and services. To properly account for the share of imports in U.S. consumer spending, it’s necessary to take into account the contribution of these imported intermediate inputs. We use input-output tables to compute the contribution of imports to U.S. production of final goods and services. Combining the imported share of U.S.-produced goods and services with imported goods and services directly sold to consumers yields the total import content of PCE.
Table 1 also shows total import content as a fraction of total PCE and its subcategories. When total import content is considered, 13.9% of U.S. consumer spending can be traced to the cost of imported goods and services. This is substantially higher than the 7.3%, which includes only final imported goods and services and leaves out imported intermediates. Imported oil, which makes up a large part of the production costs of the “gasoline, fuel oil, and other energy goods” and “transportation” categories, is the main contributor to this 6.6 percentage point difference.
Figure 1
Import content of U.S. PCE, 2000–2010
Import content of U.S. PCE, 2000–2010
Sources: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Census Bureau, and authors’ calculations.The total share of PCE that goes for goods and services imported from China is 1.9%. This is 0.7 percentage point more than the share of Chinese-produced final goods and services in PCE. This difference is mainly due to the use of intermediate goods imported from China in the U.S. production of services.
Figure 1 plots the total and Chinese import content of U.S. PCE over the past decade. The import content of PCE has been relatively constant at between 11.7% and 14.2%. Import content peaked in 2008 at 14.2%, which was probably due to the spike in oil prices at the time. The share of imports in PCE is slightly lower than in GDP as a whole because the import content of investment goods turns out to be twice as high as that of consumer goods and services.
The fraction of import content attributable to Chinese imports has doubled over the past decade. In 2000, Chinese goods accounted for 0.9% of the content of PCE. In 2010, Chinese goods accounted for 1.9%. The fact that the overall import content of U.S. consumer goods has remained relatively constant while the Chinese share has doubled indicates that Chinese gains have come, in large part, at the expense of other exporting nations.
Broader implications
The import content of U.S. PCE attributable to imports from China is useful in understanding where revenue generated by sales to U.S. households flows. It is also important because it affects to what extent price increases for Chinese goods are likely to pass through to U.S. consumer prices.
China’s 2011 inflation rate is close to 5%. If Chinese exporters were to pass through all their domestic inflation to the prices of goods they sell in the United States, the PCE price index (PCEPI) would only increase by 1.9% of this 5%, reflecting the Chinese share of U.S. consumer goods and services. That would equal a 0.1 percentage point increase in the PCEPI. The inflationary effects would be highest in the industries in which the share of Chinese imports is highest—clothing and shoes, and electronics. In fact, recent data show accelerating price increases for these goods compared with other goods.
However, it does not seem that so far Chinese exporters are fully passing through their domestic inflation. In May 2011, prices of Chinese imports only increased 2.8% from May 2010. This is partly because a large share of Chinese production costs consists of imports from other countries. Xing and Detert (2010) demonstrate this by examining the production costs of an iPhone. In 2009, it cost about $179 in China to produce an iPhone, which sold in the United States for about $500. Thus, $179 of the U.S. retail cost consisted of Chinese imported content. However, only $6.50 was actually due to assembly costs in China. The other $172.50 reflected costs of parts produced in other countries, including $10.75 for parts made in the United States.
.
ConclusionFigure 2 shows the share of U.S. PCE based on where goods were produced, taking into account intermediate goods production, and the domestic and foreign content of imports. Of the 2.7% of U.S. consumer purchases going to goods labeled “Made in China,” only 1.2% actually represents China-produced content. If we take into account imported intermediate goods, about 13.9% of U.S. consumer spending is attributable to imports, including 1.9% imported from China.
Since the share of PCE attributable to imports from China is less than 2% and some of this can be traced to production in other countries, it is unlikely that recent increases in labor costs and inflation in China will generate broad-based inflationary pressures in the United States.
mystical duet
'there is an uncanny negative correlation across individual manufacturing industries between employment changes in China and the US. Where China has expanded the most, the US has lost the greatest number of jobs. In the few industries that contracted in China, the US has gained employment."
DR
DR
dani sums up
"Since 1990, manufacturing’s share of employment has fallen by nearly five percentage points. This would not necessarily have been a bad thing if labor productivity (and earnings) were not substantially higher in manufacturing than in the rest of the economy – 75% higher, in fact.
The service industries that have absorbed the labor released from manufacturing are a mixed bag
. At the high end, finance, insurance, and business services, taken together, have productivity levels that are similar to manufacturing.
These industries have created some new jobs, but not many – and that was before the financial crisis erupted in 2008.
The bulk of new employment has come in “personal and social services,” which is where the economy’s least productive jobs are found.
This migration of jobs down the productivity ladder has shaved 0.3 percentage points off US productivity growth every year since 1990 – roughly one-sixth of the actual gain over this period.
The growing proportion of low-productivity labor has also contributed to rising inequality in American society.
The loss of US manufacturing jobs accelerated after 2000, with global competition the ... culprit."
The service industries that have absorbed the labor released from manufacturing are a mixed bag
. At the high end, finance, insurance, and business services, taken together, have productivity levels that are similar to manufacturing.
These industries have created some new jobs, but not many – and that was before the financial crisis erupted in 2008.
The bulk of new employment has come in “personal and social services,” which is where the economy’s least productive jobs are found.
This migration of jobs down the productivity ladder has shaved 0.3 percentage points off US productivity growth every year since 1990 – roughly one-sixth of the actual gain over this period.
The growing proportion of low-productivity labor has also contributed to rising inequality in American society.
The loss of US manufacturing jobs accelerated after 2000, with global competition the ... culprit."
delong nut unhusked unshelled undressed
"In order to properly respond to the situation today
policy makers need to forget everything they thought they knew about the world in the summer of 2009
and look at the situation with fresh eyes"
and just who does brad suggest might accomplish this ??
Laura Tyson
Larry Summers
Alan Blinder
Christy Romer
err or "someone like" them
and just what might they do brad ???
i mean now he wants the sunk cost fetishists gentle ben and tiny tim
OUT !!!!
goes he still think his earlier remedies could power a swift job recovery ??
reviewing :
"The Fed via quantitative easing could take as much risk as it wanted to onto its balance sheet and replace the risky assets it bought with safe assets that the private sector wanted to hold--the Fed could push its balance sheet up from $2 trillion to $3, $4, $5, or even $6 trillion if needed. The Treasury could use its HAMP money to grease the refinancing of troubled mortgages. If HAMP wasn't enough the Treasury owned Fannie and Freddie: they could borrow at nearly the Treasury rate and refinance every house in the nation if necessary in order to get mortgage risk off of banks' books where it constrained lending and off of households' obligations where it constrained spending. The Treasury could use additional TARP money as the grease via the PPIP to take tail risk onto its books and so transform risky into safe assets. The Fed could take the TALF program and use it as a wrapper to make the long-run infrastructure projects we needed to undertake sources of the safe assets the private sector wanted to hold.
Even with a Congress gridlocked and neutralized, the Fed and the executive had enough power through their ownership of Fannie and Freddie, through the Federal Reserve act, and through the TARP to do everything necessary to guarantee a strong recovery"
such is the elite prog-neo lib response then and prolly still now
do they believe anymore ??
seems pk doesn't
but brad ????
talk about sunk cost based fetishism
ya these all should be done if for nothing at least for their internal equity
but job market recovery requires
not an end run around
but a march straight thru the congress
ie a stimpak II
an eye popping freshet of funds
out flowing thru the transfer system
and a vast payroll tax holiday and a health premium rebate
funded by uncle
administered by and fed thru the corporate plans
and an SSI refund of the index theft
etc etc etc
brad:
the post 1980 elite liberal fantasy
of running a perpetual national prosperity and progress machine
by means of the unelected fed board alone is ...dead
ie new keynesian pipsqueaking won't cut the whole block of fuckin ice
now around the national production system ......no not by a long shot
a giant block of ice you NK's couldn't anticipate because you couldn't produce em
even with your air conditioning models set to desert mode
policy makers need to forget everything they thought they knew about the world in the summer of 2009
and look at the situation with fresh eyes"
and just who does brad suggest might accomplish this ??
err or "someone like" them
and just what might they do brad ???
i mean now he wants the sunk cost fetishists gentle ben and tiny tim
OUT !!!!
goes he still think his earlier remedies could power a swift job recovery ??
reviewing :
"The Fed via quantitative easing could take as much risk as it wanted to onto its balance sheet and replace the risky assets it bought with safe assets that the private sector wanted to hold--the Fed could push its balance sheet up from $2 trillion to $3, $4, $5, or even $6 trillion if needed. The Treasury could use its HAMP money to grease the refinancing of troubled mortgages. If HAMP wasn't enough the Treasury owned Fannie and Freddie: they could borrow at nearly the Treasury rate and refinance every house in the nation if necessary in order to get mortgage risk off of banks' books where it constrained lending and off of households' obligations where it constrained spending. The Treasury could use additional TARP money as the grease via the PPIP to take tail risk onto its books and so transform risky into safe assets. The Fed could take the TALF program and use it as a wrapper to make the long-run infrastructure projects we needed to undertake sources of the safe assets the private sector wanted to hold.
Even with a Congress gridlocked and neutralized, the Fed and the executive had enough power through their ownership of Fannie and Freddie, through the Federal Reserve act, and through the TARP to do everything necessary to guarantee a strong recovery"
such is the elite prog-neo lib response then and prolly still now
do they believe anymore ??
seems pk doesn't
but brad ????
talk about sunk cost based fetishism
ya these all should be done if for nothing at least for their internal equity
but job market recovery requires
not an end run around
but a march straight thru the congress
ie a stimpak II
an eye popping freshet of funds
out flowing thru the transfer system
and a vast payroll tax holiday and a health premium rebate
funded by uncle
administered by and fed thru the corporate plans
and an SSI refund of the index theft
etc etc etc
brad:
the post 1980 elite liberal fantasy
of running a perpetual national prosperity and progress machine
by means of the unelected fed board alone is ...dead
ie new keynesian pipsqueaking won't cut the whole block of fuckin ice
now around the national production system ......no not by a long shot
a giant block of ice you NK's couldn't anticipate because you couldn't produce em
even with your air conditioning models set to desert mode
preserving the delong treasure pieces part zero
Back in the summer of 2009, Barack Obama had five economic policy principals on the Treasury Bench:
And over in the corner was the Left Opposition, represented by:
The key, after all, is to get people to spend. Three things could keep people from spending:
Even with a Congress gridlocked and neutralized, the Fed and the executive had enough power through their ownership of Fannie and Freddie, through the Federal Reserve act, and through the TARP to do everything necessary to guarantee a strong recovery.
But the problem I did not see in the summer of 2009 was that the stimulus skeptics were the operational managers of the government, while the stimulus advocates were staff without line responsibilities.
Hence nothing happened.
And Peter, Larry, and Christy left.
And their successors--Jack, Gene, and Austen--are very smart men and dedicated civil servants, but they lack the strong substance-matter knowledge and aggressive policy views of their predecessors.
So the only strong policy views in the administration's internal debate mix right now are those of people who were wrong in the summer of 2009.
And when I talk to their staffs, the message I hear is not "we were wrong about how the world works, and are rethinking the issues from the ground up to figure out what to do" but instead "we were unlucky: our policies were good". Never mind that Richard Koo or Carmen Reinhart or Ken Rogoff or indeed all of us who have ever taught the Great Depression in Europe foresaw the rerun of 1931s Credit-Anstalt crisis that is now playing at the European cinema. If I were as unkind as Jon Walker, I would say that I am reminded of the old Scooby-Doo TV series, in which at the end the villain always says: "My plan was perfect, perfect! I would have gotten away with it if not for those meddling PIIGS!"
Three years ago I would have said--I did say--that Ben Bernanke was among the best available candidates for Fed chair and that Tim Geithner was among the best available candidates for Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.
Today I think they both suffer from the sunk-costs problem.
In order to properly respond to the situation today they need to forget everything they thought they knew about the world in the summer of 2009 and look at the situation with fresh eyes. I don't think they have done that. i don't think they can do that. And yet theirs seem to be the only strong policy voices from people with deep substance-matter expertise that Obama hears
If you were to ask me what thing--aside from the complete and immediate collapse of the Republican Party and the resignation of all of its legislators from both houses of the Congress: if the previous fifteen years had not taught me that Republican politicians have nothing useful to contribute to national governance the last three years would certainly have done so--would most give me confidence that America would surmount this current economic crisis, it would be personnel changes to put qualified people who saw the world as it was in the summer of 2009 into the key economic jobs:
- Tim Geithner, who thought that the administration and the Fed had done enough to stabilize the economy, that we were on track for a rapid recovery, and that the principal economic policy problems were going to be avoiding an unwanted uptick in inflation and dealing with the long-run budget.
- Ben Bernanke, who thought that the administration and the Fed had done enough to stabilize the economy, that we were on track for a rapid recovery, and that the principal economic policy problems were going to be avoiding an unwanted uptick in inflation and dealing with the long-run budget.
- Peter Orszag, who thought that the economy probably needed some (relatively small) additional fiscal, banking, and monetary stimulus to boost demand, but that the path to getting to that stimulus was to make it part of a package with policies to deal with the long-run budget.
- Larry Summers, who thought that the economy probably would need some additional fiscal, monetary, and banking-side stimulus--if only as insurance--and that dealing with the long-run budget could wait until the recovery was well-established (although in an ideal world Washington would be able to do more than one thing at a time and so it would not have to wait).
- Christy Romer, who thought that the economy probably needed (much) more additional fiscal, monetary, and banking-side stimulus--especially as insurance should things break badly--and that dealing with the long-run budget crisis probably should wait until the recovery was well-established: that the key point was "no 1937s!"
And over in the corner was the Left Opposition, represented by:
- Paul Krugman, who thought not quite "we are all going to die!" but rather that without five-alarm stimulus the risks were very high of a jobless recovery stemming from a combination of labor-market changes that had eliminated the temporary layoff and so the economy's ability to rapidly bounce-back on the labor side and of the fact that a financial-crisis solvency and safety squeeze was different from a monetary liquidity squeeze along the lines argued by Koo, Reinhart, Rogoff, and before them Bagehot, Minsky, and Kindleberger. And that Christy Romer was a wild-eyed optimist.
The key, after all, is to get people to spend. Three things could keep people from spending:
- A shortage of liquidity--and the Fed had and would continue to keep there from being any shortage of liquidity.
- A shortage of savings vehicles--but that did not seem to be the case as the bonds of even good companies were not selling for the high prices you would have then expected to see.
- A shortage of safety or an excess of risk in their portfolios--both on the debit and the credit side.
Even with a Congress gridlocked and neutralized, the Fed and the executive had enough power through their ownership of Fannie and Freddie, through the Federal Reserve act, and through the TARP to do everything necessary to guarantee a strong recovery.
But the problem I did not see in the summer of 2009 was that the stimulus skeptics were the operational managers of the government, while the stimulus advocates were staff without line responsibilities.
Hence nothing happened.
And Peter, Larry, and Christy left.
And their successors--Jack, Gene, and Austen--are very smart men and dedicated civil servants, but they lack the strong substance-matter knowledge and aggressive policy views of their predecessors.
So the only strong policy views in the administration's internal debate mix right now are those of people who were wrong in the summer of 2009.
And when I talk to their staffs, the message I hear is not "we were wrong about how the world works, and are rethinking the issues from the ground up to figure out what to do" but instead "we were unlucky: our policies were good". Never mind that Richard Koo or Carmen Reinhart or Ken Rogoff or indeed all of us who have ever taught the Great Depression in Europe foresaw the rerun of 1931s Credit-Anstalt crisis that is now playing at the European cinema. If I were as unkind as Jon Walker, I would say that I am reminded of the old Scooby-Doo TV series, in which at the end the villain always says: "My plan was perfect, perfect! I would have gotten away with it if not for those meddling PIIGS!"
Three years ago I would have said--I did say--that Ben Bernanke was among the best available candidates for Fed chair and that Tim Geithner was among the best available candidates for Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.
Today I think they both suffer from the sunk-costs problem.
In order to properly respond to the situation today they need to forget everything they thought they knew about the world in the summer of 2009 and look at the situation with fresh eyes. I don't think they have done that. i don't think they can do that. And yet theirs seem to be the only strong policy voices from people with deep substance-matter expertise that Obama hears
If you were to ask me what thing--aside from the complete and immediate collapse of the Republican Party and the resignation of all of its legislators from both houses of the Congress: if the previous fifteen years had not taught me that Republican politicians have nothing useful to contribute to national governance the last three years would certainly have done so--would most give me confidence that America would surmount this current economic crisis, it would be personnel changes to put qualified people who saw the world as it was in the summer of 2009 into the key economic jobs:
- Laura Tyson or someone like her to Treasury Secretary (recess-appointed, acting, whatever).
- Larry Summers or someone like him to Fed Chair (recess-appointed, acting, whatever).
- Alan Blinder or someone like him to CEA Chair (recess-appointed, acting, whatever)
- Christy Romer or someone like her to Assistant to the President for Economic Policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
something changed here around nixon time
and also that the latest crisis marks something
relatively big in the self realization department
for global capital if not global wagery
what's next ???
well to me lots of folks
see here and now qualitatively speaking
like a second 1930's
i see more that makes me think
of the 1890's
ya several curtains have risen and fallen
now since nixon created the new amerikan nightmare
but
this ugly gig
is still in its middle acts
at any rate
i read this piece today on the present earthwide economic crisis
http://www.solidarity-us.org/current/node/3314
and i've cut it into paper doles for easy digestion
cometh now some paine compactions :
----------------------------------
thesis:
" the finance capital strategy itself has now imploded .."
thesis:
"the capitalist class has no further strategy other than a return to classical capitalism, with mass unemployment and a minimal welfare state"
--------------------------------------
there follows a briefest history
of neo liberalism
or the rebirth of unfettered finance capital
---------------------------------------
"The crucial turning point came in the seventies when it became clear that the welfare state/full employment made capitalism unstable. Workers who are given lifetime tenure of employment with rising wages
demand control over their work and over the society....By the 1960s and the ’70s..., the working class was demanding both concessions and greater control over corporations and the economy."
translation :
in nearly closed systems
the wage price spiral emerges spontaneously
out of policy induced and maintained high employment tight job market perpetuity
and its ugly jailer becomes the stagflation crone
where "demands by workers for worker's control fits in here escapes me
beyond
conditions
pace
"straw boss teatment " etc
but soft ..we continue
" In country after country there were strikes and demonstrations which led the capitalist class to reassess its postwar strategy."
yup
" Capitalim adopted a series of measures, which have become well-known as neoliberalism but are better understood as the consequences of the turn to finance capital."
now here you'd expect an itemization
but in essence we get one spell binding word
finance capital
and in fact this new era of finance capital seems to at least in part contradict the last
recall that was seen as the supersession of liberal markets with monopoly markets
indy firms with cartels etc etc
however to continue a back track
sub thesis :
"Since workers are the majority of society... they cannot be held back under conditions where the fundamentals of capitalism are contained."
what macro policy post WWII contained ??
the normal robust cycles
the episodic release of a big hunks of the industrial job force
the respiration of capital itself that left many jobblers unoxidized between intakes
enter
the keynesian iron lung
and with it bold wage bargaining and the double helix wage price /price wage spirals they bring
sub thesis:
"...capital, as self-expanding value, uses the form of commodity fetishism (“consumerism”),
both ideologically and practically, as its preferred direct means of control."
i prefer we call a banal spade a spade
consumerism
ie in this case
a focus on ever higher material purchasing power
versus say shorter hours and more free fun time etc
or simply viewing ones life by its intakes rather then its out puts
productive labor when formally a job for hire
instead of being one of lifes prime wants
is one of life's prime burdens
precisely not worker control of their place and means of production
nor commodity fetishism
but ...
ohh btw im glad capital promotes connsumerism
as a result of its self expanding value drive
and not for reasons like orwells inner party
ie because capital thrives on power over production --
sub thesis:
"The increasing role in organization of the economy by governments and corporations
has eroded the myth that firms cannot be consciously planned rather than being run by the omnipotent capitalist"
what ?? really ???
many plans versus one big plan seems to be the hayeckian paradigm
is there aa myth
economies are the outcome of simple exchanging producing automatons
made of desiring meat ??
from where then the wild libertarian uprisings against the corporate form ???
to be scrupulously fair
our man does notice the intensification
of the MSM puppet shows
staged in virtual space
staring our mythic start ups
and mighty founder class
Al and i call it in its hay day
during reagan's reign
the george gilder hour
sub thesis:
" the public sector and the welfare state cannot be run on the simple basis of value (i.e. profit-making) itself."
i'll not touch that goo goo holy hope just yet
" The attempt to run education, health, prisons, etc. on the basis of value alone does not work. "
isn't this fact yet to be proved conclusively comrade
at least as far as big capital is concerned ???
"The fact that the bureaucratic alternatives are often poorly run
does not alter this point"
maybe not
but it does provide the clear and open
"moral " basis among efficiency worshipers
to find a better way that obviously includes privatize and profitize
in fact a good case can be made for the transformative power of capitalism when it gets around to various backward liberal professionals dominated sectors like health and education
------------------
then comes this nice moment on
north american exceptionalism
though we all have welfare states now
the euro level of public transfer system
never made it here across the north atlantic
however
" The role of a huge military sector, which is in essence a nationalized division of the economy
outsourcing much of its production, together with
a bureaucratic health machine controlled by insurance companies,
performs much of the same functions" (as the robust euro welfare state )
"in adding to (?) the consciously regulated capitalist economy."
yikes that phrase is a critter
yes the state can produce its brass hat wpa
the weapons project administration
and pay lots of young males to drill and camp out in nazi envy uniforms
bottom line
make work to us macronauts
is make work
and a defense sector and a wickedly abundent health sector
do indeed in part add back to national effective demand
what stuff like a big and chronic trade deficit take away ...
and this is crucial
the five sided shambos spend their money all of it
they don't "stash it " in bonds or stocks or pay back debts
or other stuff that doesn't produce jobs and payrolls
thesis:
" the bourgeoisie has tried to turn the clock back with increased marketization"
marketization ??
this is genuine hot to trot a-wrap-a-ho-ho-ho speak here
for
privatization securitization and of course
profitization and gamblization
it fails to notice we live in a commercial world
where even not profit outfits like foundation driven hospitals essentially thrive on selling commodities
thesis:
" The second form used to control workers (besides consumerization...)
the reserve army of labor,
which had been effectively abolished in Western Europe in the postwar years. "
here he sez something of substance
yes neo liberalism reactivated the heavy use by the corporate world of the big bad group sack
sub thesis:
in this era
"The restoration of mass unemployment ...(is) ... essential to the restoration of capitalist stability"
yup
if you don't want inflation spirals ...
generate employment cycles
okay so
we know how to maintain any degree of full employment we want
simply by using various combinations and relative quantities
of our now in place
tax borrow monetize and transfer system
but oh the price level ride we got on while we used these techniques ...
----------------------
at random another
thesis:
"the capitalist forms are undergoing rapid and uncontrollable change,
which the capitalist class is doing its best to roll back...... "
this is an attempt to swing for the fences
paraphrase??
we have a production system
that by its own inner working
drives itself toward greater interconnected ness greater socialization greater inter dependence etc
btw the stiglitz greenwald theorem can be relabeled
to show how capitalists drive this ever greater socialization as they seek
to gouge out in an un macro co ordinated fashion pockets of opportunity
simple flat open level markets can't reach
by extending the corporate umbrella they capture as yet "ungotten gains "
but in this very process
corporations violate their own and each others independent path to wealth
and when that violation comes conflict
and its conflict made severe by its communicative contagious effects
when organizations are interdependent
they can both mutually support each other and mutually pull each other down
and on occasion these inter corporate impacts can propogate and tend to replicate
themselves very fast and all over the place
and on there own without external impetus
and in these witching hours
suddenly red ink starts oozing out of a zillion places thought properly
to be the home of steady black ink
you get it right ??
the present institutional forms this growing interconnection takes ?
" combined growth "
thru " governmental organization of the economy/society, large corporations, monopoly, and the increasing role of bureaucracies of insurance companies, large corporations, and the public sector "
which like a vast mating ball of snakes
" reflect the increasing socialization of the economy/society "
but all this is mediated by corporations
that are the ever
" fracturing capitalist framework..."
yup
fractured by the arbitray incidental partitions
into the sundry groupings of cross purposed private holdings entitlements obligations etc
the latent hobbesian state of all against all
sum up:
"The effect :
a profit-driven “free market” is limited in its scope "
bureaucratic " decision-making is often more important.."
so the spontaneous trend of the system is away from simple mindless heedless blind
profit seeking "marketization"
but the capitalist remedy to the spontaneous contraction of market liberty
is to try to force more marketization
push back the tides of development
ie
" the capitalist class has been trying to roll back history."
hence master thesis :
with the coming of this great big crisis of finance capital in 08
the corporate mind thinks
more marketization !!!
whoops
not so fast after this last wild bronco bubble gig eh ??
more of the same ??
sooooo today
"the capitalist class has no further strategy" no stragey at all
" other than a return to classical capitalism
with mass unemployment and a minimal welfare state."
which as strategy goes is no strategy at all
what gives'
are they heading us
back to mike whitney's dark age
are we to become ...all of us
simple "naked i came " type
job smurfs ???
-----------------
some end notes
but what if the crisis is over??
and the protracted stag we're in here
is just part of a long range shift
in the global industrial platform's
center of gravity
from the west-euro /north amigo nexus
to modern east and south Asia ???
the two track development model
we have de facto today may be
an acceptable approximation to a best of all possible corporation-dominated planets
why fast growth for the emerger national industrial systems the big EM's of asia
and go slow... snail slow
for the mature industrial states of we/na
(there is of course the great game of resource extraction
so beloved of tangible types
the games that takes capital
any where mother nature decided
the resources should sit
and the game
which tends to be far more
"security state intensive
then welfare state intensive"
( you know activity like
arms to the temple negotiating
and
messages sent by guided missile )
this seems like great sport
to our late trot uk based academically employed
dialectical meat machine here
he gloats at the low rate of industrial investment
in the mature
euphemistically called post industrial nations
like his england and our beverly hills
but fuck em
so what i say ...so what !!!
if this is hardly a crisis for capitalism so what
and is it it a crisis
are the corporates forced back to hand to hand combat with their employees ??
MNCs look globally not nationally
or regionally or even hemispherically
they're MULTI NATIONAL
and looked at collectively
the sun never sets on the corporate sphere
so what is a rained on parade here ...
you complete it
part of the neo liberal paradigm shift of the 70's
was indeed the release of far greater flows of funds
across national borders an unfettering of finance capital
after nixon wrecked that brit fag and jew stalinists
bretton woods gold dollar and national capital controls
it was all in and all out time !!!
big feature
the new global paradigm with flex rates and fast moving capital
effectively allowed the US to run signifigant and chronic trade and BOP deficits
all the better to go global eh ??
labor ??? collective bargaining social contract
"nice plant we have here now isn't it
kind of a pity to close it tomorrow
instead say three years after you retire eh sean ...eh ??"
the 40 year great wage moderation commencd right about there
no ??
with the flexible dollar and gargantuan deficits in trade
today post kold war
with open doors everywhere
its spring time
all the time and corporate capital flies where ever it may
yes portfolio moves dwarf real direct foreign investment
but portfolio moves in an integrated hi fi system
always dwarf real direct investment
and all you manhattan laputa haters
never forget
the portfolio herd maintains the forex tilt
and the profit arbitrage the real corporations
feed off of
nope it isn't all simple blood sucking of the real corporations
hell they're really finance outfits at their core themselves these days ---
so instead of looking at the old centers of real non paper profits
look in the massively revamped global context
at the new centers of real profit
surely the chindian's twin industrial explosions
with their attendant bright marginal competitive
areas like vietnam thailand and indonesia etc
provide ample opportunity
for real MNC industrial investment
or to be careful
for ample MNC "real participation"...eh ??
recall the point of major profit extraction
can come anywhere in the geo-temperal transaction chain
in chindia or ireland or on a space station i suppose
--branson --
so long as THE MNCs control access
to the big mature national markets
and
keep control of the existing "stock"
of technical know how and know what
they can negotiate for themselves
the lions share of the total global profit take
---------------------
stop reading here
the rest is deeply ideocentric
the term "finance capital "gets quite the work out in this piece
--though thankfully as an orthodox late trot
hillel avoids the neologistic buzz varient
" financialization"
which turns out to be left speak for simple securitization---
however instead of barking
this magic word finanzkapital
--and it is one word in german--
at every stop in his pass
over the last 40 years
it might be better to suggest specifically
some of the innovations of the neo liberal era
that supported
the consumerism method of control
example
post wage price spiral 70's
na/we both moved away from ever more transfers
between the state and the toiling idiot masses
ie welfare state and
even after mao won the kold war for nixon
even the security state macro economics began a long slow tapering
-- reagan?? an anomoly of hegemony --
and to replace this drop in policy controled effective demand
we got the heavy intensification of both collateralized consumer credit
and non collatrealized
-- marvelous :the bubble value of house lots and the ersatz value of human capital --
consumer credit .." house as atm and plastic money a go go "
these operated as partial
ED effective demand substitutes
for what had been take home wage increases
and indeed not to put too blunt an edge
to this
since 07 that has run aground
for the near to mid range future at least
but hey as we noticed a stag today is just what doctor sadisticus ordered
btw
there's a nice case of formal convergence here
our hi fi 's used much the same model for the familly farm economy pre 1929
which equally found itself run aground ...several times in fact
over its epical arc
from the end of the civil war to the door step of the new deal
and the fundamental "final morphing" of our national agristructure
the great ease out of the country's old social back bone
the familly farming itself
no doubt
trying to ease out
the cottage run
-- even ifin part socially built ---
commodity form of labor
ie job time raising
may prove more protracted
then easing out familly corn raising and pig tending
btw
bureaucrat/ commercial health-higher ed - incarceration complex not withstanding
i predict
no move
from job smerf to limited liability gulag serf for most of us
though attaching one self to a corporation
becoming its ward at an early age
might become a lucrative vent for surplus
at the wagery house and hut level
if it can be camoflaged as a system of loans
-----------------------
in general i see no evidence the neoliberal form
of the last 40 years has yet morphed
nor can i see anything here
in mr H's piece to suggest it has
but like all else this must end
and suggesting the answer will be
dismantling the remains of the public transfer system
strikes me as patently wrong
yes the private household credit rush
is for now "over"
and the stag of the job market
stretches ahead to the event horizon
but i submit real honest nasty
deep pruning of the entitlements system
has peaked
the miraculous esape from
" the debt ceiling of death"
demonstrates
the transfer system butchers
are all hat and no knife
sum up
hillel notices a double down on the systemic value of a good sized army of unemployeds
great !!!!
but
and ???
well there he has only the word crisis
and i suspect subconciously the crisis
he feels is not the crisis he points at
the crisis he feels
is right there inside
his inner world poli-econ model
he's operating a creaking marxicocal glass piped jelopy
that can't come up the latest hill to see over it
he needs a really new formulation
to match this grave new world stage
he "sees so darkly" ahead of us
we all do
-----------------------------
there's a clear sense
something changed here around nixon time
and also that the latest crisis marks something
relatively big in the self realization department for global capilal if not global wagery
much like happened in that same 70's period
what's next ???
well to me lots of folks
see here and now as a sort of qualitatiely speaking
1930's rerun
i see more that makes me think
of the 1890's
ya several curtains have risen and fallen
now since 70
but
this ugly gig
is still in its mid acts