Re: imcu questions

["William B. Ryan" <william_b_ryan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Referencing http://www.geocities.com/new_economics/mosler-06-02-02

[Tomasson]

It means that newly created purchasing power placed in the hands of the
unemployed will secure for them a piece of the pie at the cost of those
who provided factor inputs to the baking of the pie - in other words,
it is INCOME REDISTRIBUTION by monetary/govt. finance means.

[Mosler]

Yes!

Simply handing out checks is income redistribution, while hiring for
pay presumably increases national output as the newly employed provide
services etc.

-----

Then how would our friends Gunnar and Warren respond to the following?

"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at
suitable depths in disused coalmines which are then filled up to the
surface with town rubbish, and leave it to private enterprise on well-tried
principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do
so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing
territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of
the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital
wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually
is.  It would, indeed, be more sensible to build houses and the like;
but if there are political and practical difficulties in the way of this,
the above would be better than nothing."

Keynes is making the point here that the community's real income and
capital wealth may be increased by the mere fact that more money is placed
into circulation that is not "costed" into real production.  Certainly
digging up old bottles is not real production but complete waste.  The
same effect could be accomplished more rationally by handing out banknotes
without the waste.

The point is in diametric opposition to Say's Law.


--
William B. Ryan
william_b_ryan@xxxxxxxxxx - email
voicemail/fax - 1-866-678-3967 - toll free