Marxist Monetary Theory (Ft. Bill Mitchell)

[@1DimeRadio]

Get access to over 50 exclusive podcast episodes and my private discord server by becoming a Patron of 1Dime: www.patreon.com/OneDime⁠⁠

[@taxirob2248]

bro were you dozing off at 29:40??

[@Achrononmaster]

Patreon are a bunch of crooks. Why do you use their service? If people seriously wish to support you there are ethical alternatives, like KoFi or OpenCollective or Liberapay. Richard Stallman may have got "cancelled" by the woke crowds, but he is one of the good guys. Opt for computing in freedom over convenience.

[@tom_rob]

@@Achrononmaster - Glad to learn this. Patreon takes (extracts) too large a fee ?

[@vivalaleta]

I'm a Marxist because the theory makes perfect sense to me. It isn't like being in a political party. I don't understand a division between it and MMT.

[@1DimeRadio]

Exactly. The people who see Marxism as static political doctrine are basically dogmatists who treat it as a religion rather than a tool to understand the material realities involved in changing it (ie class conflict, productive forces, cycles of capiral etc)

[@DumasMoran]

Yeah, its like Tony says, there's going to be a transition period between capitalism and communism. Shouldn't it at least function to benefit people?

[@abody499]

I think this is all quite interesting that people don't see what seems to me an obvious incompatibility. Could a Corbyn or Sanders type get voted into, say, Argentina, and do "the people's QE" there? Within that question you'll find what is missing from Mitchell's analysis and what it really is that enables this system we all are so much against to just keep going.

[@DumasMoran]

@@abody499 are you meaning that it's equally as realistic to vote our way to MMT as Communism?

[@Leftistattheparty]

​@abody499 as long as there is the physical resources, and inflation is kept in check, probably.

[@frankblunt9511]

Thank you for having Dr. Mitchell on your show! Great discussion! We'll never overcome capitalism without understanding the money question and the division of the working class by the indoctrination of society by the capital class. We must finish what Fred Hampton started in the sixties and learn the lessons of that history in being prepared for the full force of empire to crush us.

[@RollieHudson1]

Excellent discussion! Very informative regarding political-economics, MMT, wage-labor dynamics and history as well. Thank you!

[@abody499]

Makes a solid point about education being co-opted by capital - that's where the focus needs to be. Among whatever causes there might be for the existence of the conditions in which it's possible for the right to be so dominant is a lack of critical consciousness. Address that and the world has a chance to unite imo.

[@theswoletariat3479]

Swear to God you keep interviewing people directly after I look them up and do a deep dive

[@Achrononmaster]

What took you so long looking up Bill? lol Keep up with the pace Swole.

[@falsificationism]

Here after listening to the entire thing on Spotify just to "like" the video. Still can't support Tony Onedime financially yet, but dang... This was pitch perfect. Mitchell perfectly illustrates the exact right cleavage between Marxists of the more orthodox variety and people with an MMT understanding. Honestly, the sooner we learn this cleavage is mostly artificial, the better. We need everyone to be on the same page *yesterday.* Regarding the Warren G debate, I think I'm on team Mitchell as well. Just an all around fantastic discussion. Wonderful questions from Tony, and thanks for giving Mitchell time to answer so thoughtfully and concisely. Cheers!

[@tristanbleisch8242]

Please have michael hudson on, he is also a marxist mmt economist

[@86blackberrywhite]

Technically, Hudson is not a true MMT economist (his understanding of some of the finer details of monetary and banking operations is a bit lacking to say the least) although they are generally in agreement on a lot of things. His views on class and geopolitics are really good though.

[@tristanbleisch8242]

@86blackberrywhite he views all economic activities are through the lens of a balance of payments, so yes it is a little different than pure mmt, but he works with and uses the work of mmt economists and is a proponent of mmt so I consider him to be one.

[@Leftistattheparty]

Exactly what ive been waiting for.

[@theswoletariat3479]

We HAVE seen a falling rate of profit. Maito and several other have proved its decline since the 1840s from 40% to under %10ish today

[@1DimeRadio]

I think what Bill means is that we have never really seen the “final breakdown that Marxist previously predicted would be the result of the falling rate of profit

[@HahaDamn]

@@1DimeRadioMarx points out countervailing tendencies because the crises he witnessed in his own time did not result in the final breakdown of capitalism, Marx’s point is that a political solution is necessary, because capitalism will continue on without conscious human control of the system

[@bumpty9830]

I appreciate this interview. There’s one statement, from the host, that I think deserves some push-back: “at least we know social democracy works.” I am one of the millions of Americans without proper healthcare, because of “social democracy.” I’m also one of the many Americans who didn’t get a voice in the recent presidential election, also because of “social democracy.” Social democracy is capitalist theater that makes the explicit choice to keep some people comfortable while others, who could otherwise also be comfortable, suffer. I generally agree with the guest’s policy proposal of a jobs guarantee, with the caveat that jobs be available that benefit humanity. It’s no good offering people the choice between starvation or enforcing the starvation of others, for example. And unfortunately, in the US where I live, a guarantee of socially useful work is about as revolutionary an idea as ending capitalism.

[@1DimeRadio]

American never had social democracy wtf are you talking about

[@bumpty9830]

How do you describe the FDR administration,@@1DimeRadio? And how do you describe the American Left that has been failing since then?

[@alexhubble]

Norway is definitely not in the EU. It is in the EEA but with that much oil, who needs other people's rules?

[@axShinsei]

Great conversation, thank you both.

[@numbersix8919]

More! Encore! ❤ More Dr Bill please ✊️

[@allypoum]

Interesting stuff. Turns out I like this guy.

[@ІлляВетров-й2д]

Ok. This is epic.

[@josdesouza]

Great conversation! We need more of it across social media.

[@itsdayto]

As a dumb Canadian I would love some videos on the CCRF/Red Torries or some stuff on MMT in Canada

[@1DimeRadio]

I definitely plan on it!

[@tinahorne6018]

I am with Bill. Definitely getting the book. I never use Amazon willingly and prefer to buy from the good guys

[@newtonfinn164]

The basics of MMT are simple enough for a child to grok. Yet most of us do not grok them. What an incredibly demoralizing example of the power of propaganda, which causes us to equate the science of fiat money with the inflation that can be caused by creating too much of it.

[@YoungGirlz8463]

Inflation is the point of fake money.

[@shiftyparadigm7049]

Not really about propaganda, more about the deficit of logic and reasoning powers of most humans. Even if they could parrot mmt dogmatically, they still wouldn't understand it. Dynamic systems with positive and negative feedback loops are inherently complex and nuanced. Take this example, walk into a shop and pay with cash and see if the attendant can work out your change, 90% of my engagements prove that even this very very simple task is too complicated. Sometimes they will implement some kind of jingoistic counting up system, and look to you for agreement, when realistically the amount owing is correct or incorrect and not open to subjective interpretation.

[@antonyjh1234]

The schooling system isn't set up to go against the current propaganda, or current system, so it's working as it should.

[@cakexo7756]

W episode 🖤 with a very interesting professor 🫡

[@MrJfergs]

One thing I don't understand about MMT, is how you would place more money into the economy without causing any inflation. I think it is obvious that the state can issue an unlimited amount of its own currency if the majority of its debt is held in its own currency. However this does not stop the problem of more units of currency "chasing" the same amount of goods. I understand that normally when MMT is practiced it is done by issuing bonds from the federal gov to the provincial / state gov. However (and this is where I may be wrong) that most places that this has been practiced the currency becomes devalued. Not to say this is the sole reason for inflation, however I am not sure how you would overcome this issue of supply and demand for a particular currency.

[@DumasMoran]

"more units of currency "chasing" the same amount of goods" The goal is to set up the productive sector so that it expands as the money supply expands.

[@DumasMoran]

Of course this leads to the ecological/environmental problems that come along with growth-based economy, but there are ways of growing "deeper", as opposed to just more stuff. Where Marx really shines is the control over what is produced, as it's stupid and destructive to source the funds for redistribution on more and more Pigouvian taxation.

[@alexhubble]

@MrJfergs yes, I don't follow either. Govt makes money, govt taxes people, what does it do with that money? Do they burn it? Literally strike it off the ledger? If not, there's just a new budget worth of money injected every year. Don't follow, more research...

[@LongDefiant]

You destroy the currency by taxing it away from where it pools (coffers of the wealthy).

[@TheReaderOnTheWall]

Taxes destroy the money injected via planned labor.

[@scrumpy8192]

Good video

[@benjaminmiller3075]

Really curious how this works in international trade. Thinking of EU collectively punishing Greece for their spending relative to GDP

[@shannonm.townsend1232]

We're Greece's austerity measures a result of loans from the IMF?

[@applejuice54321]

I'm an ML and i think MMT is an interesting and convincing way to view capitalism. My big hangup is this: is there any proof that the government can actually spend substantially more money without incurring inflation? I cannot find much on this. If the tenets of MMT are correct, but inflation will increase linearly with spending then i think the whole argument is moot. I understand that taxes will destroy money supply, but inflation is largely driven by psychology. There are examples where economists keep predicting deflation, but prices just simply keep rising because people have other ideas about the currency. Ultimately, i think an MMT system would still be vastly inferior to a socialist one, but it's still better than the current one.

[@taipizzalord4463]

It is not just about buying political influence You also do not want to have the Rich have so much buying power to where they own all the assets and the working class is forced to pay ever increasing rents to them in perpetuity A point that Gary Stevenson makes.

[@alexhubble]

1:07:45 "unemployment is terribly damaging" agreed. But it was said earlier that governments tax people to ensure a pool of unemployed people, to ensure those resources aren't used by the private sector. An anti inflation measure. Did I misunderstand, is that a MMT policy or a thing that all governments do?

[@YoungGirlz8463]

They all do it as a side-effect of fiat currency.

[@johnb4639]

@alexhubble - your confusion stems from your conflation of separate issues -i.e. inflation control, employment stabilisation and taxation purpose. 65m56s "... what MMT tells us is that ultimately there's two broad ways of controlling inflation. You can either do it through unemployment or you can do it through an employment structure... The way in which the neoliberal system controls inflation... is effectively to create unemployment. 67m30s "... the MMT position is that .... unemployment is terribly damaging to families and individuals. A better way of dealing with inflationary pressures emerging from distributional struggle is to have an employment policy - where the government says it'll employ everybody at a fixed wage, a socially inclusive minimum wage. And I've called that the job guarantee. ... And why that creates an inflation anchor. is because it's the government setting the price of one important commodity, the price that it's willing to ... pay for any worker who doesn't have a job. 52m06s "... so take a scenario where all the productive resources are being used in the economy. ... and then the currency issuing government wants to introduce a major decarbonisation of the economy, which will require it to mobilise...a whole stack of resources in the public sphere to promote transition away from fossil fuel use.... ... the government has no financial constraint, so it can go into the private market and buy up those resources if it wants to now shift into a green economy.... what are the implications of that? Well, if all the resources are currently being used the only way the government can succeed in doing that is to outbid the current users. 53m18s It can ...buy them. .... It can never run out of its currency, but it has to go into a bidding process in the market system and outbid the current users. ... Obviously that would be inflationary ... So how can I do that without creating an inflationary situation? Well, come in tax. Because what taxes do is deprive the non government sector of purchasing power.... the government doesn't need the tax revenue to spend, but what it needs is for the non government sector to be able to spend less.... If you want to be simple, creates unemployment. Now, that unemployment would persist, that idle set of resources would exist unless the government increased its spending..."

[@shiftyparadigm7049]

It's a matter of defining unemployed as someone who is seeking a store of value that can be used as a tax credit in exchange for their labour. Even if everyone was working full time and had food shelter etc they would all continue to work and live and be unemployed at the same time as soon as the government threatens jail if tax isn't paid. So unemployed doesn't mean not working, or not thriving, it simply means that they are not working for tax credits aka keep-out-of-jail tickets

[@mattgilbert7347]

@@alexhubble it's a technical point about the meaning of "unemployed" in the context of a sovereign fiat system. It should illustrate how coercive the system really is - what you think about that is a different question. Warren Mosler will just straight up admit "yeah it's totally coercive but that's the system we live in".

[@alexhubble]

@shiftyparadigm7049 "seeking a store of value that can be used as a tax credit in exchange for their labour" I'll confess, I have been to the pub since I wrote the first comment, that opener is a bit daunting...

[@abies2000]

Australia's property investment class is one of the worst examples of destructive selishness in the world. How did the founders of the most clear eyed lens on macro economics come from such a place? Just a different time? Before the cashed up plunderers got their hooks into education.

[@swagpilledcommisar]

he cant miss

[@antonyjh1234]

The San Francisco news story about an animal up a tree while Bosnia was going on is no different to western media now about Ukraine.

[@mattgilbert7347]

Love Bill. He & L. Randall Wray bring the class analysis and class politics to modern monetary theory. I would love to see Colin Drumm make an appearance on 1 Dime Radio. He's been on Varn Vlog a few times and brings a different perspective to these issues. I just started reading his PhD thesis "The Difference That Money Makes: Sovereignty, Indecision, and the Politics of Liquidity" which is publicly available online.

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

Very interesting. But he’s completely wrong about the falling rate of profit - it has been observed for a long time. It was even observed by the classical bourgeois political economists before Karl Marx.

[@1DimeRadio]

The point he was making was that the rate of profit has never resulted in a “final breakdown” in the way that Marxists predicted it would.

[@emptycloud2774]

Yet, here we are with billionaires continuing to increase their wealth; with firms like Blackrock continuing to expand how much capital they own. It seems like whenever internal contradictions of capital accumulation starts to lead to a recession, the state steps in with bailouts using their currency issuing function - that has been captured by the capitalist class and their army of "lobbyists" and bought "politicians" that end up stacking the courts. Think about Elon Musk and how much of his wealth is based on government subsidies and grants. I don't hear the media cry wolf about inflation here - or whenever a military budget that serves American capitalist interests abroad is passed. Which adds to "corporate profits". The capitalist class and accumulation of profit is more sophisticated now compared to 150 years ago.

[@kakistocracyusa]

This a very simplistic conversation dealing in stale, sophomoric concepts and vague moralizing signals rather than the nuts and bolts of how this works.

[@Chris-xc1tm]

By the time you can restrain capital to not take advantage of MMT you no longer need it. You can already build social housing and subsidize food production. MMT without that power and you are simply subsidizing landlords 2 years later. Total waste of time other than as a thought experiment.

[@ETALAL]

My problem with MMT pundits is not one of them has ever explained what is the price discovery mechanism

[@satyajitsheth4705]

Interview Paul Cockshott.

[@MellieLane]

MMT: A level playing field, that accounts for everyone and produces accurate data?

[@the_conflationist]

1Dime!

[@virtue_signal_]

FYI, I believe that every idea is as good as every other idea...

[@TylerRein]

No one holds that view .. no one

[@ArctheLadder]

I'm a goof to be doing this, but I'm writing it anyway: "Mateship"... wait a minute that's "Asabiyyah!"

[@jeffisfine]

Good interview. If Marxists are objecting to MMT because it doesn't jive with Marxism, that strikes me as very weird. The best point in the interview was that MMT is just a set of observations or a framework to understand monetary functioning under certain conditions. One could perhaps argue that the observations are inaccurate or need more context, but to throw it out for something like it not having a class analysis again seems weird. Maybe I don't understand MMT enough, but it's not making an analysis that could have or lack a class aspect. If we accept that Marxism is a materialist framework, then we should absolutely be integrating any observations, theories, etc. that could help our understanding of the world and thus how-to bring about a socialist society. Something that Lenin, for example, was very explicit about. MMT should be no different than the latest agricultural observations and techniques as long as they are accurate.

[@shannonm.townsend1232]

Can MMT function without other countries being tied to US dollar

[@serversurfer6169]

Where can we learn more about "continental marxism," and its origins and evolution? 🤔

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

I’m pretty sure he’s referring to the Frankfurt School.

[@1DimeRadio]

Not exactly. If he is, then that wouldn't make sense because the Frankfurt School aren't about Identity politics at all. Its more so Postcolonialism that contains a lot of that stuff. And he also mentioned post-structuralism, less so because of identity and more so because it was so against enlightenment ideals, including Marxism itself.

[@serversurfer6169]

@@1DimeRadio Okay, if it's not the Frankfurt School, then what is it? Y'all said the CIA were sponsoring workshops about it? 🤷‍♂

[@alexhubble]

54:39 governments raise tax to keep a pool of labour and resources available for government projects? Really? I have to look into this...

[@Drforbin941]

We have seen a falling rate of profit

[@delly2088]

1:11:45 i'll also add the fact that the reason the left has significantly decreased and moderated over the decades is because life has gotten more procarious and 3rd spaces have been shut down. People just don't have the time, energy or space to socialise and self-educate anymore, so they might be more likely to die for a revolution but more often than not, it just creates apathy and nihilism. These reforms could give people some breathing room to picture a better world and the way to get there. EDIT: i forgot to mention, i think the real problem with electoralism is 1) It's most advocated for in the countries where it's most useless, probably to pacify radicals 2) It gives the false impression that socdem is the end all be all and not just a "warrior's rest" as mom calls it

[@joegithler]

Luigi was here

[@CHAOS9H]

Europe and the so called "global north" do have a public sector "tradition" or "culture" but its pretty obvious that the constant sabotage, under funding and anti universal healthcare propaganda is having an effect on working class people who would be greatly disadvantaged if we were to transition to a mainly private healthcare system or a more private healthcare system. I am always skeptical about social democrats who push for class collaboration but i have to say, even tho i think we cant vote wealth away and only with a revolution could we really overcome capitalism, people get so fixated with the idea of revolution that they forget without the conditions for one, the best way to create them is to advocate for better conditions for the proletariat. ex: the fixed job market proposal in this video would be great, specially in a world where more and more people work under precarious conditions, with increasingly less time to form/learn class consciousness

[@shannonm.townsend1232]

I want everyone to have better conditions, but historically modest improvements in working conditions and wages have been granted by the ruling class to avert revolution including during 'hingepoints' like May '68.

[@theobradshaw2761]

@1Dime Radio you cook too hard

[@DumasMoran]

The idea of US federal spending not being constrained by tax receipts is great, but if the budget is overhauled toward ends that benefit society at large, there's already so much money there for the public good. Imagine cutting the US military budget in half and redirecting $400B toward single payer healthcare and necessary infrastructure.

[@RealProgressInAction]

That's not how it works

[@YoungGirlz8463]

What's so great about a $40 trillion deficit and who decides what benefits society at large when it can't protect individuals form itself? There is no ethical way to force your morals onto your neighbors so military spending isn't necessary and if you stop buying fake food with your fake money healthcare is obsolete too. These people ae more concerned with keeping other down than doing anything productive. Socialism is bad karma.

[@DumasMoran]

@@RealProgressInActionHey Steve! Is there a simple way to explain what I'm wrong about? I'm not really talking about mechanics. I'm just saying that a lot of MMTers that I've talked to seem to envision economic embrace of MMT as opening up possibilities for spending on top of what the fed gov already does. And I'm saying before getting carried away with that conversation, we have a lot of cutting back on crap we shouldn't be currently funding, a la corporate welfare, bombing brown babies, etc.

[@HyrulianNerd]

The idea is that comparing things in the budget is a losing game. MMT says we should fund things that are good and not fund things that are bad. The argument about 'should we fund the military' resulting in 'yes' should never mean we don't fund healthcare.

[@MrJCerqueira]

Bill Mitchell misses the forest for the trees. Nobody wants to be pontificated to

[@86blackberrywhite]

How so?

[@LongDefiant]

Hey 1Dime, you should have Anark on.

[@1DimeRadio]

I recorded an episode with him a couple of weeks ago actually! Its just back logged and will be out about 2 episodes from now

[@alexhubble]

@@LongDefiant @1DimeRadio oh good, I have had a look at his channel, he presents a plausible case for anarchism. I say plausible because, honestly, I don't think people are as nice as anarchists say they are, but still...

[@LongDefiant]

@@alexhubble Compassion and charity don't ruin anarchism like they do capitalism. Anarchism is orderly. Members decide the rules for themselves and operate accordingly.

[@DumasMoran]

@@LongDefiant Anark should have Bill Mitchell on.

[@alexhubble]

@@LongDefiant thanks for the reply! 'Anarchism is orderly. Members decide the rules for themselves and operate accordingly' I have a soft spot for Anarchism because... that makes perfect sense. Why can't people just act like that, just like reasonable people? But I read a lot of history. And not a lot of history is about Anarchist collectives. Sadly, they get overwhelmed by hierarchical polities who have one guy in charge who's really good at fighting. Any State, if it can't defend itself, it won't be a State for long. Also, complexity without hierarchy is hard. But I am open to persuasion because it does sound... perfect.

[@the_only_Tripp]

Brother one fidgeter to another, it is much more distracting for me as the viewer to be wondering if you're going to be leaning over to block what you're doing with your mic every time you move than it would be if you just readjusted your collar visibly.

[@GoldcapX]

Thanks to Dr. Mitchell! Such a great discussion. If we're on the Aussi Economist vibe, maybe you can chat with Dr. Keen next?

[@Achrononmaster]

@15:00 I highly doubt we will ever see a falling rate of _nominal_ profit. If there is an ecological crisis then yeah, in _real terms_ there could be a falling rate of *_real_* profit. But that's not the fault of the "capitalist system" per se. It is because of greed and corruption that are fairly naturally endemic to capitalism. The "capitalist system" does not _cause_ human greed and selfish individualism. But it helps it along. (As does postmodernism and doomerism.)

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

The falling rate of profit has been empirically observed for centuries, even before Karl Marx. The profits fall as a percentage of the investment.

[@PeterPotnoodle]

Progressivism and Marxism are not the same thing, Mitchell is a progressive liberal who thinks capitalism can be made fairer by simplistic measures, which, according to Marxist theory will never happen. Full employment guaranteed by the state is still wage slavery.

[@1DimeRadio]

You don't understand Bill‘s views very well. The type of policies Bill proposes would be for a transitionary state between capitalism and socialism. In practice the transition can't occur overnigh. You can't speedeun socialism. Unless by your idea of spcialism involves giving all the power to the state to forcefully control everything, which.. Hasn't turned out very well throughout history. If that's your idea of socialism, then your distinction hasn't been proven in real practice. In practice “revolutionary” Leninists just ended up establishing states with same kind of policies that social democraciss had (social programs, free/affordable basic services, + Full employment, except fully employed by the state, whereas social democraciss had mixed economy) minus the democracy part… lol

[@emiliomacchip]

​@@1DimeRadiohow do you think social democracy came about? the vanguard party and the marxist leninist movement put the pressure necessary for capitalists to make that appeasing concession after all

[@HahaDamn]

@@emiliomacchip Social democracy, was the progressive wing of capital taking on the socialist political platform of the era - this started way back under Bismarck and can be seen in Teddy Roosevelts political platforms in the early 1910s. What later socialists have done is mistake the platform for the goals of the socialists. It really had nothing to do with Vanguard parties per se, it had to do with the existence of an organised and independent working class movement with its own politics and parties. The Marxist Leninist parties of the 20th century helped undermine the potential for revolution in the west by tying the labour movement to the progressive wing of capital. Socialists called the social democrats, social fascists for a reason. They changed their tune on Moscow’s orders once the Nazis invaded and the help of western capitalist powers was needed for the USSR to survive. Instead of peace, using the power of the workers to end the war, the workers were put to the task of ensuring the victory of the allied powers in the war, and doing whatever was necessary, including destroying their conditions to ensure this outcome. It was the problem the working class and social democratic parties faced during ww1 writ large. The capitalist political parties granted the workers concessions in exchange for their political support. This abandonment of independence, and statification of the unions and civil society organisations, was their downfall.

[@DumasMoran]

@@emiliomacchip You have to swing for a home run, just to get a single. Swinging for a single will strike you out. The trick is to only expect a single or double while putting forth maximum effort.

[@shtefanru]

@@1DimeRadio it's not only about policies, but who makes those policies... if it's the state, the capitalists parties, the burecurats, they can take them away.. thus it's about power/politics

[@menudobucket9837]

1:12:44 ~ “The revolution was called on account of rain.” Excellent: I say, let it rain; and let latte sippers step aside! Capitalism sucks!

[@alexhubble]

48:00 ish. Tax the rich 'out of existence', OK. The government, however, doesn't need the money. Because it creates all the money it needs. OK. Why is it taxing at all? I'm going to have to go over this MMT stuff again. It sounds very, very close to perpetual motion but perhaps I don't understand.

[@YoungGirlz8463]

Oh it's a pyramid scheme alight. If it was really about lobbying, they could address it directly.

[@JP-JustSayin]

They cover this (about 52:00), but taxation causes some resources to go un-utilized... which means the government can buy them... with new money ... without fueling inflation.

[@alexhubble]

@JP-JustSayin Thanks for the reply! OK, let me run through my issue. Government taxes and causes resources to go un-utilised. It can then buy them up without inflation. I'm assuming the government is using this for capital projects, regular employees would get a salary. So the government wants to build a bridge, a big one, good government project. What you will need are: Architects, civil engineers, mechanical engineers, construction project managers, concrete specialists, builders and finally a road gang. Plus a bunch of heavy plant. Again, it wants to build a hospital. So much skilled labour required, it seems counter productive to enforce their unemployment. Doctors - do we keep a pile of them, waiting for the new hospital? I can't see any economic benefit in keeping those people in enforced idleness, they are all useful skills. So the government would have to bid anyway, or shoot itself in the foot. Please feel free to shoot me down if I'm miles off!

[@1DimeRadio]

I'm guessing you are new to 1Dime and 1Dime radio. No worries. I recommend checking out the videos on the main channel on MMT (I linked a playlist in the description of good videos and lectures on how all this stuff works).

[@JP-JustSayin]

@alexhubble In the example he is explaining the difference between the skandi model and the anglo model, and the reason why skandi taxes are higher is because that model does more in the aggregate. Your example is extremely concrete and has definite boundaries. I'm not going to argue a position. I'm just pointing out that this WAS covered in the interview. Maybe you disagree with the framing in the interview. Maybe it's an incorrect framing. Maybe you are concretizing it in bad faith. I dont really know. ... but there WAS a discussion of this topic in the abstract. You can make of it what you will. Cheers 🙃 Edit: also elsewhere he says the "job guarantee" plays into this by making the "unemployment requirement" that is built into capitalism more humane. So it's all covered. MMT is not a set of policies, it's a way of understanding and maximizing the policy space... you can do what you want ... MMT just explains the possibilities for how without telling you what you should want. Maybe bridges and hospitals are bad, actually. Maybe the things that are good are tax cuts for billionares and a doubling of the stock market. If thats what a society wanted im sure MMT could help bring that about just as easily as hospitals and bridges. 🙃

[@Nick-tn3ms]

Hey 1dime you should have bad empanada on.

[@robertjenkins6132]

He has the TPD (Toxic Personality Disorder), but the makes good long-form video essays. I've binged many of them.

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

He’s pretty annoying

[@emiliomacchip]

bad empanada is ironically the most grouded commentator ive heard so far

[@HahaDamn]

He’s a flog

[@marcelloursic424]

Very much a Marxist and not a Leninist.

[@alexhubble]

1:13:00 'I'll be there, leading the charge' err, challenge. One of the reasons I am against revolutions, they end up not being lead by well meaning professors, but by people with a much darker streak in their nature. Of necessity, dirty deeds have to be done, but maybe not the people you want running a country. I also disapprove a croissant revolutionaries, on general principles...

[@1DimeRadio]

That's why democracy should always be part of socialism. Even if its not radical democracy, you need a democraric method of selecting leaders and a relatively meritocratic method of selecting bureocrats, all of which should always be held accountable

[@alexhubble]

@1DimeRadio no argument here! But it's worth noting, 'meritocratic' shifts in meaning. I read a book about the Irish independence war with a quote about a guerilla leader called Tom Barry. "Well, Tom Barry maybe a murderer, but at least he is a good one". Possibly the most Irish statement ever written. And Tom Barry wasn't even a bad guy, but the point stands.

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

Revolution is a violent process usually. People have to accept that fact.

[@jenniferpatton5108]

#BanBitcoin #EatTheRich

[@brianjacob8728]

how about central bank money theory. that's the problem. the ruble is more stable than the dollar.

[@Sytall]

You mean the russian ruble? This currency is extremely volatile. 1 dollar was for like 30 rub in 2013 then it went to 65rub in 2014 in 2022 dollar reached 150 rubles, now 1dollar is around 110rub (it was 100 a month ago). You can check the graphs.

[@Rob-fx2dw]

This Mitchell guy is one of the worst hypocrites who talks on economics that is on any you tube video. His whole mantra is based on some idea that others have more wealth than him that motivates his thinking which he has latched onto and it dominates his thinking. Sour grapes is also one of his often exhibited emotional traits. It is one of the worst cases of hypocrisy based on arrogance that is exhibited since it is based on that distorted envy and the delusions rising from it. He does not even examine his own thought and realise that those who are less wealthy than him could say the very same thing about him that he is making about others who are wealthier if they were stupid enough to do so. His arrogance and sense of self importance prevents that so he plays to people less informed than he is in order to get them onside by spreading false beliefs. It is not based on facts which when confronted with he cannot explain away even if they disprove his theory and show it is garbage. He supports MMT which has as a foundational belief that money gets its value from taxes and this idea is shown to be totally wrong by the fact that in every country where inflation made the money worthless there were taxes and despite those taxes the money became worthless. No only that the idea is proven false by the fact that countries with higher taxes do not have more highly valued money because of those taxes which they would if the idea of taxes putting value into money was reality but they don't. When confronted with that fact he fails to be able to address either point. Why ? because his beliefs are just a fraud.

[@shmoosmith]

Only disagreement is the crap about the postmodernist or continental marxist (postmodern neomarxists you could say) because its basically just peterson rhetoric but from a left wing perspective. Otherwise the guys perspective seems really important to promote for the future of left politics.

[@shannonm.townsend1232]

Not exactly or completely; he's not wrong about the CIAs involvement in New Leftism, the CCF, etc. Gabriel Rockhill also has similar analysis in more depth.

[@ludviglidstrom6924]

Funny accent

[@TheControlBlue]

🤮🤮🤮