Vickrey macro = Turbo Keynes

It takes a party

The fifth essence of leninism This does not imply Becoming a state party But it does mean A Leninist vanguard cadre party Able to morph thru endemic Constitution into a disciplined administrative apparatus As well as a deliberative innovating Policy evolving Rank and file empowering Body A consistent player and at once a game changer

Society's virtuous monsters

Personality disorders Or genetic necessities To species propagation

What about Plutocratic ballot box pluralism appeals the liberal mind sets

Co ops remedy to exploitation?

No ......the FIRE SECTOR MUST BE FULLY SOCIALIZED Re call the formulation Associated producers LIKE THE D OF P VERY MUCH A FLESHLESS SCHEMATIC

Markets and plans : the original sin of markets ...imposed rules Such that all markets in time become non pure spontaneous orderings

Two channel earned income with two sources : market wage and social wage

USWR
 universal social wage rate

  Try here say
 5 dollars an hour
For 20 hours a week

     100 dollars a week max

Say 1000 hours a year times
175  million wage earners

Under a trillion buck program

  No big deal really

Marxist value theory and the marginalist revolution

  Does marginal cost pricing
Free to vary from average cost
  Conflict
 with  classical
average cost plus pricing

Of course it does
With increasing unit productivity
And falling unit cost
A capitalist firm
 is constrained by break even prices
Or it bleeds  red ink unto death
On the other hand
Demand constrained markets
By definition
 Are pricing above marginal unit cost
If the goal is simple operating profit max

Marginal Unit COST
  c (q)   = FC /Q + vc (Q)
q = marginal unit sold
Q = total units sold

FC = fixed costs

c(q)< price

Social security data wage rate and hour tracker

Right now we should have a complete output of wage data
Location mapped and time stamped to process in real time

 Let's drop the inate tendencytoward ultra rapid
unitary product price and wage rate models

That assume what markets need to prove to us

What happens as we move from a few agents to many to a billion ?

Markets
Acting thru time and location
Many markets by tupe of commodity
Time and location

at least one
for each commodity type
 many many firms
even more distinct
Commodities

What a scramble of crossing and double crossing decisions

The basic unit a single
if an n compounding of items
Then  itemized into n distinct transactions

  transaction data (T DATA )
Items prices
Time place buyer seller payment terms

Surely we can build a raw t data  gathering system
 and at various scales And scopes  etc

Real time info streams

Look at the real system out there
With more and more T level
Observations

Let the social production system advance in small finite leaps and transformations

The pile of commodities is always finite ...even if in prospect limitless

Analytic value theory

Hey The market economy is a discrete System With discrete money prices and transactions Yes there are results from analytic Like in number theory can be valid but ..... Models with discretion are better The uncountable infinitesmals and info its Are Zeus like powers Leave the lightening and thunder bolts to the ivory academy bell tower

Point of production v point of extraction in exploitation process

The two points neednt ever coincide at all The capitalist production system tends To equalize product level profits Thru market forces dynamic impact on firm level product Mark up realizations This is by no means a simple reflection Of the exploitation of the direct labor inputed into that product at that stage by that firm alone ..... Market mediated competion for jobs may optimally equalize wages for Certain tasks across firms But this only equalizes that tasks rate of exploitation without determining the exact rate of that exploitation or it's points of extraction in the whole system of production and circulation

Capitalist breakdown part II

Discussion of the formula Edit The number of years n down to the absolute crisis thus depends on four conditions: The level of organic composition Ω. The higher this is the smaller the number of years. The crisis is accelerated. The rate of accumulation of the constant capital ac, which works in the same direction as the level of the organic composition of capital. The rate of accumulation of the variable capital av, which can work in either direction, sharpening the crisis or defusing it, and whose impact is therefore ambivalent. The level of the rate of surplus value s, which has a defusing impact; that is, the greater is s, the greater is the number of years n, so that the breakdown tendency is postponed. The accumulation process could be continued if the earlier assumptions were modified: the rate of accumulation of the constant capital ac is reduced, and the tempo of accumulation slowed down; the constant capital is devalued which again reduces the rate of accumulation ac; labour power is devalued, hence wages cut, so that the rate of accumulation of variable capital av is reduced and the rate of surplus value s is enhanced; finally, capital is exported, so that again the rate of accumulation ac is reduced. These four major cases allow us to deduce all the variations that are actually to be found in reality and which impart to the capitalist mode of production a certain elasticity ... Much of the remainder of Grossman's book is devoted to exploring these "elasticities" or counter-crisis tendencies, tracking both their logical and their actual, historical development. Examples of each would include: Depressed interest rates, investment capital transferred to unproductive speculation, e.g. housing stock, art objects. Enlarged state sector bleeds value from the accumulation process via taxes. Wars destroy capital values. The Reserve army of labour (unemployed) created to discipline wage claims. Imperialism

Capitalist Breakdown grossman

c = constant capital. Initial value = co. Value after j years = cj v = variable capital. Initial value = vo. Value after j years = vj s = rate of surplus value (written as a percentage of v) ac = rate of accumulation of constant capital c av = rate of accumulation of variable capital v k = consumption share of capitalists S = mass of surplus value, being: {\displaystyle k+{a_{c}\cdot c \over 100}+{a_{v}\cdot v \over 100}} k+{a_{{c}}\cdot c \over 100}+{a_{{v}}\cdot v \over 100} Ω = organic composition of capital, or c:v {\displaystyle c_{0}} c_{0}: {\displaystyle v_{0}} v_{0}) j = number of years Further, let {\displaystyle r=1+{a_{c} \over 100}} r=1+{a_{c} \over 100} and let {\displaystyle w=1+{a_{v} \over 100}} w=1+{a_{v} \over 100} The formula Edit After j years, at the assumed rate of accumulation ac, the constant capital c reaches the level: {\displaystyle c_{j}=c_{o}\cdot r^{j}} c_{j}=c_{{o}}\cdot r^{j} At the assumed rate of accumulation av, the variable capital v reaches the level: {\displaystyle v_{j}=v_{o}\cdot w^{j}} v_{j}=v_{{o}}\cdot w^{j} The year after (j + 1) accumulation is continued as usual, according to the formula: {\displaystyle S=k+{c_{o}\cdot r^{j}\cdot a_{c} \over 100}+{v_{o}\cdot w^{j}\cdot a_{v} \over 100}={s\cdot v_{o}\cdot w^{j} \over 100}} S=k+{c_{{o}}\cdot r^{{j}}\cdot a_{c} \over 100}+{v_{{o}}\cdot w^{{j}}\cdot a_{v} \over 100}={s\cdot v_{{o}}\cdot w^{j} \over 100} whence {\displaystyle k={v_{o}\cdot w^{j}(s-a_{v}) \over 100}-{c_{o}\cdot r^{j}\cdot a_{c} \over 100}} k={v_{{o}}\cdot w^{{j}}(s-a_{{v}}) \over 100}-{c_{{o}}\cdot r^{{j}}\cdot a_{c} \over 100} For k to be greater than 0, it is necessary that: {\displaystyle {v_{o}\cdot w^{j}(s-a_{v}) \over 100}>{c_{o}\cdot r^{j}\cdot a_{c} \over 100}} {v_{{o}}\cdot w^{{j}}(s-a_{{v}}) \over 100}>{c_{{o}}\cdot r^{{j}}\cdot a_{c} \over 100} k = 0 for a year n, if: {\displaystyle {v_{o}\cdot w^{n}(s-a_{v}) \over 100}={c_{o}\cdot r^{n}\cdot a_{c} \over 100}} {v_{{o}}\cdot w^{{n}}(s-a_{{v}}) \over 100}={c_{{o}}\cdot r^{{n}}\cdot a_{c} \over 100} The timing of the absolute crisis is given by the point at which the consumption share of the entrepreneur vanishes completely, long after it has already started to decline. This means: {\displaystyle ({r \over w})^{n}={s-a_{v} \over \Omega \cdot a_{c}}} ({r \over w})^{n}={s-a_{v} \over \Omega \cdot a_{c}} whence n = {\displaystyle {log\left({\frac {s-a_{v}}{\Omega \cdot a_{c}}}\right)} \over {log\left({\frac {100+a_{c}}{100+a_{v}}}\right)}} {{log\left({\frac {s-a_{v}}{\Omega \cdot a_{c}}}\right)} \over {log\left({\frac {100+a_{c}}{100+a_{v}}}\right)}} This is a real number as long as s > av But this is what we assume anyway throughout our investigation. Starting from time-point n, the mass of surplus value S is not sufficient to ensure the valorisation of c and v under the conditions postulated.

Jesuit reductions in latin america circa 17 35

A model for collective residential and  production community units
Floating  in a market system
  Base
 A  garden and  handicraft shop
 System of commodity production

Social history as a cascade

Social history and the social dialectic

Take
the phenomenology of markets
And the  motion laws of exchane value
below
The  every item is unique vector
of transaction prices
Instant  by instant
 For  marketed  products

Global patterns of synchronicity and de synchronicity

Convergence in sub system cycles versus divergence in sub system cycles itself cyclical ? A simplistic simpletons question

Kaleki distribution cycle models at HET

Local development zones LDZs

LDZs need to cover slow developing regions To produce local exportable products and thus Extra jobs supported by extra local revenue sources j These zones should be integrated country wide And managed at the federal level with federal backed credit and grants

Exportable product location market

This could CO ordinate Location development zones Taking the location decision interaction into a market mechanism

Buffet trade Lerner market

have a plan to suggest for getting it done. My remedy may sound gimmicky, and in truth it is a tariff called byanother name. But this is a tariff that retains most free-market virtues, neither protecting specific industries nor punishing specific countries nor encouraging trade wars. This planwould increase our exports and might well lead to increased overall world trade. And it would balance our books without there being a significant decline in the value of the dollar,which I believe is otherwise almost certain to occur. We would achieve this balance by issuing what I will call Import Certificates (ICs) to all U.S. exporters in an amount equal to the dollar value of their exports. Each exporter would,in turn, sell the ICs to parties--either exporters abroad or importers here--wanting to get goods into the U.S. To import $1 million of goods, for example, an importer would need ICsthat were the byproduct of $1 million of exports. The inevitable result: trade balance. Because our exports total about $80 billion a month, ICs would be issued in huge, equivalent quantities--that is, 80 billion certificates a month--and would surely trade in anexceptionally liquid market. Competition would then determine who among those parties wanting to sell to us would buy the certificates and how much they would pay. (I visualize thatthe certificates would be issued with a short life, possibly of six months, so that speculators would be discouraged from accumulating them.) For illustrative purposes, let's postulate that each IC would sell for 10 cents--that is, 10 cents per dollar of exports behind them. Other things being equal, this amount would meana U.S. producer could realize 10% more by selling his goods in the export market than by selling them domestically, with the extra 10% coming from his sales of ICs. In my opinion, many exporters would view this as a reduction in cost, one that would let them cut the prices of their products in international markets. Commodity-type products wouldparticularly encourage this kind of behavior. If aluminum, for example, was selling for 66 cents per pound domestically and ICs were worth 10%, domestic aluminum producers could sellfor about 60 cents per pound (plus transportation costs) in foreign markets and still earn normal margins. In this scenario, the output of the U.S. would become significantly morecompetitive and exports would expand. Along the way, the number of jobs would grow. Foreigners selling to us, of course, would face tougher economics. But that's a problem they're up against no matter what trade "solution" is adopted--and make no mistake, a solutionmust come. (As Herb Stein said, "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.") In one way the IC approach would give countries selling to us great flexibility, since the plandoes not penalize any specific industry or product. In the end, the free market would determine what would be sold in the U.S. and who would sell it. The ICs would determine only theaggregate dollar volume of what was sold. To see what would happen to imports, let's look at a car now entering the U.S. at a cost to the importer of $20,000. Under the new plan and the assumption that ICs sell for 10%, theimporter's cost would rise to $22,000. If demand for the car was exceptionally strong, the importer might manage to pass all of this on to the American consumer. In the usual case,however, competitive forces would take hold, requiring the foreign manufacturer to absorb some, if not all, of the $2,000 IC cost. There is no free lunch in the IC plan: It would have certain serious negative consequences for U.S. citizens. Prices of most imported products would increase, and so would the pricesof certain competitive products manufactured domestically. The cost of the ICs, either in whole or in part, would therefore typically act as a tax on consumers. That is a serious drawback. But there would be drawbacks also to the dollar continuing to lose value or to our increasing tariffs on specific products or instituting quotas onthem--courses of action that in my opinion offer a smaller chance of success. Above all, the pain of higher prices on goods imported today dims beside the pain we will eventuallysuffer if we drift along and trade away ever larger portions of our country's net worth. I believe that ICs would produce, rather promptly, a U.S. trade equilibrium well above present export levels but below present import levels. The certificates would moderately aid allour industries in world competition, even as the free market determined which of them ultimately met the test of "comparative advantage." This plan would not be copied by nations that are net exporters, because their ICs would be valueless. Would major exporting countries retaliate in other ways? Would this startanother Smoot-Hawley tariff war? Hardly. At the time of Smoot-Hawley we ran an unreasonable trade surplus that we wished to maintain. We now run a damaging deficit that the wholeworld knows we must correct. For decades the world has struggled with a shifting maze of punitive tariffs, export subsidies, quotas, dollar-locked currencies, and the like. Many of these import-inhibiting andexport-encouraging devices have long been employed by major exporting countries trying to amass ever larger surpluses--yet significant trade wars have not erupted. Surely one will notbe precipitated by a proposal that simply aims at balancing the books of the world's largest trade debtor. Major exporting countries have behaved quite rationally in the past and theywill continue to do so--though, as always, it may be in their interest to attempt to convince us that they will behave otherwise. The likely outcome of an IC plan is that the exporting nations--after some initial posturing--will turn their ingenuity to encouraging imports from us. Take the position of China,which today sells us about $140 billion of goods and services annually while purchasing only $25 billion. Were ICs to exist, one course for China would be simply to fill the gap bybuying 115 billion certificates annually. But it could alternatively reduce its need for ICs by cutting its exports to the U.S. or by increasing its purchases from us. This lastchoice would probably be the most palatable for China, and we should wish it to be so. If our exports were to increase and the supply of ICs were therefore to be enlarged, their market price would be driven down. Indeed, if our exports expanded sufficiently, ICs wouldbe rendered valueless and the entire plan made moot. Presented with the power to make this happen, important exporting countries might quickly eliminate the mechanisms they now use toinhibit exports from us. Were we to install an IC plan, we might opt for some transition years in which we deliberately ran a relatively small deficit, a step that would enable the world to adjust as wegradually got where we need to be. Carrying this plan out, our government could either auction "bonus" ICs every month or simply give them, say, to less-developed countries needing toincrease their exports. The latter course would deliver a form of foreign aid likely to be particularly effective and appreciated. I will close by reminding you again that I cried wolf once before. In general, the batting average of doomsayers in the U.S. is terrible. Our country has consistently made fools ofthose who were skeptical about either our economic potential or our resiliency. Many pessimistic seers simply underestimated the dynamism that has allowed us to overcome problems thatonce seemed ominous. We still have a truly remarkable country and economy. But I believe that in the trade deficit we also have a problem that is going to test all of our abilities to find a solution. A gently declining dollar will not provide the answer.True, it would reduce our trade deficit to a degree, but not by enough to halt the outflow of our country's net worth and the resulting growth in our investment-income deficit. Perhaps there are other solutions that make more sense than mine. However, wishful thinking--and its usual companion, thumb sucking--is not among them. From what I now see, action tohalt the rapid outflow of our national wealth is called for, and ICs seem the least painful and most certain way to get the job done. Just keep remembering that this is not a smallproblem: For example, at the rate at which the rest of the world is now making net investments in the U.S., it could annually buy and sock away nearly 4% of our publicly tradedstocks. In evaluating business options at Berkshire, my partner, Charles Munger, suggests that we pay close attention to his jocular wish: "All I want to know is where I'm going to die, soI'll never go there." Framers of our trade policy should heed this caution--and steer clear of Squanderville. Warren Buffett is chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway. FORTUNE editor at large Carol J. Loomis, who is a Berkshire shareholder, worked with him on this article. 

Markets are cages for firms

modern mixed market economies" This term is too ambiguous and unfocused  And without essential class power relations Mixed ? We have these outfit types State civic public private Market ? Outfits of all types interact thru markets  But markets are exceedingly heterogenious Economies ? This really is the noun Modern economies Market economies With mixed qualifying Mixed as in state civic and for profit outfits And for profit both public and private the essential question when push comes to punch Who hits hardest Answer  The profit outfits ... Greenwald stiglitz theorem sets a new welfare paradigm Beyond pigou and tje term "market failure " Failure of spontaneous emergent market outcomes is the norm not the except Pure  Markets don't fail to optim8ze here and there  They simply fail to optimize everywhere No market requires zero intervention  Zero imposed structuring etc  The exception study should be market success not market failure Existing Market results as welfare optimal  is practically zero  in real social systems The hidden revolution in micro  Of the 70's and 80's  Is the road ahead to socialism  just as the much celebrated  Counter revolution in macro Is the road back to the guilted age ... The lacking cohesion Can come from macro and meso Lerner mechanisms Market like systems that provide the CO ordination and incentives to market level firms to stay on the paths  to green earth II ... Guilted age ....... Ie 1870 to 1896 But  A guided age is what we ought to aim for ... An age of Lerner mechanisms Market like decentralized imposed systems To CO ordination and incentivizes  Market level outfits ... Chen Yun talked of markets like they were birds that needed to be caged by society thru the state Actually markets are the cages Firms the birds ..... Markets as cages See coming web site ... CAges for firms

Social corporatism

Social corporatism  A federal charter of limited term That enables social management of the corporate ........ Anti capitalist ? No  But .. .... limiting the sway of firm level profits  To pro social Firm level profits viewed from  The interior of the firm  And without regard to other considerations are by their mode of generation too often anti social guide lines Reply

Stiglitz macro

pathetic " ?? what more ought a social liberal mention .....in an IMF venue stig mentions these points : fiscal policy works.....fed oughta set targets for more then just product inflation ...much stronger financial regulation ( self regulation is unreliable )needed "Real stability will require a full range of tools for capital account management" (NB) !!! "... including cross-border regulations on capital flows" "...industrial policies have played an important role in enhancing growth " "the attempt to incorporate micro-foundations was laudable, it was important that they be the right micro-foundations. " "While in normal times, credit and money may be highly correlated, this is not so in the usual times surrounding crises" "countries with central banks that were not independent performed so much better than some of those that were partly because the latter were “cognitively captured” by the financial markets that they were supposed to regulate" "Standard models not only don’t provide a good explanation of the origins of a crisis, such as the one Europe and America are experiencing, they also don’t adequately explain the slowness of the recovery..." "for years, output has remained substantially below its potential" i note only one knock kneed shibileth " it was important not to lose sight of the risks which high and variable inflation can impose" ------------------------------------------------ any radical economist should quickly see the "tensions" revealed here what are we looking for in main stream economics anyway ?? the oeuvre of uncle joe is a treasure trove of useable models and insights thesis: from the papers of joe and his assorted co authors one can build a very nice micro foundation for a sharp edged marxian " critique " of present day political economy we marxist economists need to recognize this is guerilla war we live off the class enemies weapons in our liberated zones

Unicorns and neutral policy rates

neutral policy rate exists somewhere between a unicorn and socially oriented corporations Progressives need remember  The rate structure for dollar debt  Is social engineered by the complex Of federal and wall street institutions  It no more emerges from pure market transactions  and  pure market participant expectations  Then a fly emerges by spontaneous generation from horse apples  AND There is no neutral rate of intetest Where output prices are in steady state  only more or less succesfully contrived  Steady rates of Inflation .......... One could define a path of policy rates that result from attempts to stabilize the rate of output inflation over some time interval But that path of rates  would presumably  be arrived at thru macro managers adjustments to anticipated inflation outcomes  This is active management to expected outcomes  not talking about where something called a price impact netural policy rate might be  neutrality exists  Invisibly dancing before their eyes

Social corporations and social markets

Corporate laws regs taxes  need a giant transformative  Jubilee Social corporations out of capitalist corporations Recall capitalism is non social There can be no social capitalism ................. Corporations even when operating inside  Well designed and managed social markets  Themselves  Need internal management incentives that promote  Active management  To become and remain  Maximally congruent with optimal social welfare

Uncle's potential output

In an open social production system Technically The INPUTS for the coming production periods are global in origin And subject only to Transport and installation lags Assume unlimited foreign demand For debt issued by the state in the Domestic currency How can one estimate such a domestic production system's potential output

Hebrew job answered by the Lord

Comrade Job

His dispair

His mentations

His epiphany

A crazy little blessing : FRANKIE

$ 10 a gallon with a 5 dollar ration

The tax per x

 final user price Fixed  very high
Maintained
with a variable tax

Gas electric petrol

 Ration card

Rations are just dynamic endowment distribution paths

Household or per capita
 Carbon emision rations
with trade exchanges

Exchange theory 101

 Why wait
Gas  electric petrol

Social innovation budget

What percent of gross output
  optimally should flow into the innovation sector ?

HOW should its funding
 get extracted and  or injected ?

What set of basic units ?

What complex system of funding management
Super imposed ?

What set of Ratios
To guide   grants loans
Earnings
revenues bonuses  rewards etc

   Managing compensations
 v distributing
Bundles of use rights

 

Innovation economy aka studio lab economy

To what extent does the social hegemony
Of  corporate capitalism limit innovation


We constantly contrast Gosplan to wall street

And cenyrally hard wored Socialist firm  enterprise
to market option capitalist corporate enterprise

But  firm level ex appropriation
 Of  intellectual discoveries requires
  Controlled innovation
If it is to be directly hooked into the credit system

If not hooked into the credit system
If dependent on costly budget constrained  grants and advances.....

 Subject for investigation

See stiglitz baker as take off strip

Lets review Capital accumulation end zones

Okay earth human population is stabilized

Technical progress continues
But the production system has glided down to
Simple reproduction
With the entire surplus allocated
For social dividends and R and D

Is this a qualitatively clear end point for the present Long run plan horizon ?

It's not general material satiety
But it is the end of accumulation
Ie expanded reproduction

Long range plan stages v infinite horizons

Models with infinite horizons
Create mischief

So
Despite concatenation
AND entanglement

Better we have a stage of undefined duration
A target end zone for the present Long run stage
Of global  social production development

Imagine a  "material "
  universal satiety
 there's where
THE utilitarians started
I guess it's like a bash equilibrium
Where everyone has no interest in increasing their flow of goods and services

Nice ugly burger boy formulation eh ?

Firm spending out of net earnings can be directed with a Lerner market

Call it spend it right or lose  it

 Net or gross really or any combo pattern
Requires warrants to deviate or lose  the funds
To gos plan central
Off sets are the warrants to protect earnings
A net new investment funded by the firms earnings

Co ordinating macro markets or Lerner markets

We can generalize Lerner's
Mark up warrant cap and trade mechanism

 To its category

Lerner markets
Co coordinate firm actions
Harnessing them to a macro path
Chosen by Gosplan