tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post4093286334213011282..comments2024-03-28T01:17:42.336-04:00Comments on The Philosopher's Stone: A REPLY TO TOM CATHCARTRobert Paul Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11970360952872431856noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-7745474844873250082016-03-08T16:01:09.505-05:002016-03-08T16:01:09.505-05:00I haven't read the O'Connor book and will ...I haven't read the O'Connor book and will have to check that out. In 1971 around the time he must have been writing it, the US underwent a fundamental change to it's monetary regime with the suspension of the direct convertibility of the dollar to anything, freeing up considerable fiscal policy-space. <br /><br />Now, what the State *could* do in the areas of bread-and-circus social welfare programs, or cost-reductions to capital, has increased. As the sole issuer of a currency that isn't really backed by gold or any other commodity or bundle of foreign reserves, things like a universal basic income or job guarantee programs become more plausible (though it was perfectly feasible even under the gold standard / fixed-exchange rate times), since the government can no longer involuntarily default on it's debt. Those who actually carry out government spending in the treasury and federal reserve - and even a few congressmen/senators - seem to understand this just fine, but refuse to point it out. I think it's primarily for the reason that it would embolden the working class.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06047511619684278892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-3021400636690322016-03-08T15:52:50.444-05:002016-03-08T15:52:50.444-05:00By the way, why do we lefties always refer to cutt...By the way, why do we lefties always refer to cutting the safety net in half as "outrageous" but doubling it as "crumbs"?Tom Cathcarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136970056480275148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-11770638421835244942016-03-08T15:50:24.985-05:002016-03-08T15:50:24.985-05:00Tom Cathcart,
I agree with you. I also in favor...Tom Cathcart,<br /><br />I agree with you. I also in favor of more crumbs and also far from sure that the revolution is coming. My comment about "socialism in one country" means that there's a limit to even social democratic or welfare state measures (crumbs) these days, given how mobile capital is. Sorry that I wasn't clear. In any case, it's obvious that some crumbs (for example, single payer healthcare) could be instituted. However, if too many crumbs are handed out, you have a massive capital flight, unless that capital has nowhere to flee to: that is, unless people are demanding and getting more crumbs everywhere.s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-59648980644378595462016-03-08T15:37:51.088-05:002016-03-08T15:37:51.088-05:00The question is what to do while waiting for the r...The question is what to do while waiting for the revolution. I'm in favor of way more crumbs, partly because I'm not sure the revolution Is coming, and partly because, as Yeats says, when things fall apart, the revolution may come in the form of a rough beast. (Trump?) A commenter a couple of weeks ago seemed to be suggesting voting for Trump to hurry the revolution along. Now there's a leap of faith!Tom Cathcarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136970056480275148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5687347459208158501.post-50808630220309427042016-03-08T15:28:02.299-05:002016-03-08T15:28:02.299-05:00Henry Ford lived in another era, an era before ma...Henry Ford lived in another era, an era before making cars could easily be outsourced to China or wherever the lowest wages are paid.<br /><br />"Socialism in one country" seems less and less an option, given how mobile capital is these days. s. wallersteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17448905469871566228noreply@blogger.com