[jeffkrol]

I don't support the idea of a country with zero government. I just think the role of government should be limited to protecting the rights and liberties of its population. I want a government that gives me the most freedoms and the least amount if interference in my life.

Actually so does MMT.. they "support" capitalism not supplant it.. Problem is one s perception of "support" i.e. guaranteed job for the jobless via the Fed.(and supporting the job pool as in absorbing private "excess") is another's "supplant"...

Gov. , by providing basic protections to health and the environment is also both support and interference in YOUR life...............trick is to define it and realize you do not live ALONE, no matter your perception.


and why argue w/ me when I say the Fed doesn't NEED taxes to pay for anything..

Actually if you think of it the State (and it's eminent domain and need to "pay it's bills" ) gov. is WAY more a threat to your "liberty" than any Fed............

Actually speaking of the "devil". (honestly I did not see this till after I posted) ...........

The overseer of Fannie Mae (FNMA), Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks said it may take action in an attempt to block municipalities’ use of eminent domain to seize mortgages backing securities.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency has “determined that action may be necessary on its part to avoid a risk to safe and sound operations at its regulated entities, and to avoid taxpayer expense,” the regulator said today in a statement.

The regulator’s press release and a notice in the Federal Register seeking public comment didn’t detail what steps it’s considering, which may range from legal action to moves by government-supported Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could shut down their financing of lending in the areas where the tactic is employed. Corinne Russell, an FHFA spokeswoman, didn’t immediately respond to an e-mail seeking additional comment.

Local governments led by San Bernardino County in California are weighing the use of eminent domain powers to forcefully buy non-delinquent loans from so-called non-agency securities without guarantees from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-08/fannie-regulator-may-seek-to-block-...izures-1-.html
.

---

Last edited by jeffkrol; 08-08-2012 at 09:04 AM.

[jeffkrol]

moving on to Russia:
Katrina vanden Heuvel, Vladimir Putin, and Russia-Style 'Austerity' - Forbes

[Winder]

Actually so does MMT.. they "support" capitalism not supplant it.. Problem is one s perception of "support" i.e. guaranteed job for the jobless via the Fed.(and supporting the job pool as in absorbing private "excess") is another's "supplant"...

Gov. , by providing basic protections to health and the environment is also both support and interference in YOUR life...............trick is to define it and realize you do not live ALONE, no matter your perception.

and why argue w/ me when I say the Fed doesn't NEED taxes to pay for anything..

MMT is the opposite of limited government control over the economy. MMT requires much more government control over the economy/money supply and I don't think it can be done. If we had people who were competent controlling the money supply and the credit expansion we would not be in this recession in the first place. Why should I believe they are competent enough to get us out.

I don't have a problem with MMT when it comes to retrospective accounting of some economic events. Just like Keynes aggregate demand theory, which does a good job explaining multiple economic events in history. If we want to use these tools to learn from history then that is great, but I don't think they offer good solutions for future policy implementation.

The act of government should be one of cooperation not coercion. If Ideas are good you don't need coercion. If the ideas require the use of force then we need to rethink the ideas. Nobody is opposed to clean air or health. The question that needs to be asked is do these polices that promote these ideas do more harm than good and what are the unintended consequences? The ends can't justify the means in a civil society.

[jeffkrol]

MMT is the opposite of limited government control over the economy. MMT requires much more government control over the economy/money supply and I don't think it can be done. If we had people who were competent controlling the money supply and the credit expansion we would not be in this recession in the first place. Why should I believe they are competent enough to get us out.

I don't have a problem with MMT when it comes to retrospective accounting of some economic events. Just like Keynes aggregate demand theory, which does a good job explaining multiple economic events in history. If we want to use these tools to learn from history then that is great, but I don't think they offer good solutions for future policy implementation.

The act of government should be one of cooperation not coercion. If Ideas are good you don't need coercion. If the ideas require the use of force then we need to rethink the ideas. Nobody is opposed to clean air or health. The question that needs to be asked is do these polices that promote these ideas do more harm than good and what are the unintended consequences? The ends can't justify the means in a civil society.

No, clean air is clean breathable air.. there should really be no "scale of acceptance"..but MMT has nothing to do w/ it.. It is an economic system, not moral..
As a side note:HR2990
h r 2990 in session 112 - To Create A Full Employment Economy As A Matter Of National Economic Defense; To Provide For Public Investment In Capital Infrastructure; To Provide For Reducing The Cost Of Public Investment; To Retire Public Debt; To Stabi
The "heart" of MMT is in this bill, read it slowly :
Full Text of H.R. 2990: National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2011 - GovTrack.us

[Winder]

No, clean air is clean breathable air.. there should really be no "scale of acceptance".

If that were true we would banish all cars and coal power plants. All natural gas applications and fossil fuels. There obviously is a scale of acceptance.

[jeffkrol]

If that were true we would banish all cars and coal power plants. All natural gas applications and fossil fuels. There obviously is a scale of acceptance.

read and critique hr2990 please..........

http://www.monetary.org/