PKT
mailing list archive

Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]

Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

Re: Mosler Seminar



I *think* we're still on the seminar?

Reactions and questions reading Randy Wray's paper:

The stirrings of the welfare-reform revolution makes the
ELR a pressing issue.  We know the jobs are not now there,
or the unemployed are not qualified - if you prefer.

Some variety of ELR seems absolutely necessary, either
direct government jobs or subsidized private jobs.
As they say, "the devils in the details" but too many
devils and nothing works.

1. If the BPSE depletes the labor pool, will not the
   Fed raise interest rates to restore it - at least at
   the *slightest* sign of inflation?

2. Will not the presence of BPSE accelerate immigration,
   especially illegal?  This cannot be controlled any
   more than drugs can be controlled by the drug war.
  (but I *don't* mean to raise *that* subject (please).

3. Is the BPSW a "living wage"? What is a living wage?
   Is it survival sleeping under a bridge, living in
   a shanty, supporting one child, supporting a family?
   Is a degree of health-improving hunger assumed?

4. On a BPSE job, what incentive would there be?
   Ribbons and medals, "worker-of-the week" bonus?
   I'm old enough to remember the gangs of WPA workers
   leaning on their shovels - a sight that sickened my
   father - why I remember it.  Can the government, run
   by kids who don't remember, now do better?

5. With no more welfare, BPSE means work or starve.
   Is this not slavery without the whips?

6. Is mothering or house-wifing a job qualified for BPSW?
   If not, I'd like to know why - other than the male
   view of what constitutes "work."

7. Is "saving" understood to be *only* government paper
   of some color?  If not, why does the existence of
   unemployment imply desired saving less than actual?
   (I fear this is in GT and I'm going to be scolded.)

8. I confess that I have yet to accept taxes as the sole
   basis of fiat money.  If the government declares a money
   legally enforceable "legal tender" for contracts, then
   aren't taxes simply another contract payable in that
   money?

9. "... bond sales are ... not necessary to 'finance'
   deficit spending."  I assume this refers to the ELR
   generated deficit.  What about the deficit generated
   by other government purchases? --  or go to (10.)

10. Bond sales ... as an interest rate maintenance
    operation ....   Why "maintain" interest rates?
    Why not let them fall and kill all the rentiers?

  "Downsize This" if you will!

      Mason










Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]