Zer esan nahi du T-k DTM delakoan?

Bill Mitchell-en Understanding what the T in MMT involves


(i) Teoria bat dago tartean1

(ii) ‘Modernoa‘ dela eta2

(iii) ‘Teoria‘ dela eta3

(iv) Gizarte zientziak eta natur zientziak4

(v) Ekonomia zientzia5

(vi) Iragarpen zehaztasuna, kongruentzia6

(vii) Azken hamarkadako akatsik handiena7

(viii) Abstrakzioa8

(ix) Zergatik dago T bat DTM delakoan?9

(a) Sektore balantzeak10

(b) Sektore balantzeen ekuazioaz11

(c) Sektore balantzeak eta DTM12

(d) DTMko gastu-modeloa13

(x) Teoriak dioena14

(xi) Inflazioaz15


(1) MMT is much more than a descriptive lens.

(2) It is a coherent body of propositions that allow us to understand how the monetary system works. Understanding comes with explanation.

(3) Explanation requires, in part, theory.

(4) MMT is appropriately named. There is no misnomer.

Gehigarria: Warren Mosler-en legea

There is no financial crisis so deep that

a sufficiently large tax cut or spending increase

cannot deal with it

1 Ingelesez: “I’ve been meaning to write about this topic for some time, but a Tweet the other day reminded me that there was still major misunderstandings of what Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) represents and that it was time to clarify some of those errors in comprehension. Specifically, there is a current out there that considers MMT to be incorrectly labelled because according to the argument there is no theory involved. It’s hard to imagine why anyone would think that but the fact that they do tells me that I should write this blog post. As I noted yesterday, our Macroeconomics textbook to be published by Macmillan Palgrave in February 2019 is full of theory. It has a lot of description, taxonomy, accounting, history, and philosophy, but also a lot of theory that ties some of those other components together in a meaningful way. The T in MMT is not a misnomer. The Tweet I saw the other day also said there was nothing new in MMT so what’s with the modern bit! I have already dealt with that issue in the past.

Ingelesez. “On the question of the ‘modern’ bit, the following blog posts are relevant among others:

1. Modern Monetary Theory – what is new about it? (August 22, 2016).

2. Modern Monetary Theory – what is new about it? – Part 2 (long) (August 23, 2016).

3. Modern Monetary Theory – what is new about it? – Part 3 (long) (August 25, 2016).

When I don’t know the meaning of something I initially look up the dictionary, which in part, also helps me understand the etymology involved.”

Ingelesez: “The Oxford Dictionary entry for Theory is:


1 A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

1.1 A set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based.

1.2 An idea used to account for a situation or justify a course of action.

1.3 Mathematics A collection of propositions to illustrate the principles of a subject

It comes from the late C16th “denoting a mental scheme of something to be done) – “contemplation, speculation”.

The Oxford Thesaurus notes:


hypothesis, thesis, conjecture, supposition, speculation, postulation, postulate, proposition, premise, surmise, assumption, presumption, presupposition, notion, guess, hunch, feeling, suspicion.

This list isn’t very helpful because it conflates many different conceptual structures with the work theory.

For example, a theory begins, in my view with a hypothesis or conjecture which is different to a postulate or assumption. A theory is more than a conjecture though.

The Wikipedia entry for – Theory says:

A theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract or generalizing thinking, or the results of such thinking … Depending on the context, the results might, for example, include generalized explanations of how nature works …

In modern science, the term “theory” refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that scientific tests should be able to provide empirical support for, or empirically contradict (“falsify”) it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge … Scientific theories are distinguished from hypotheses, which are individual empirically testable conjectures, and from scientific laws, which are descriptive accounts of how nature behaves under certain conditions.

So we get an idea that theory is about abstraction intending to explain characteristics of reality.

However, while a conjecture is a proposition we consider, in advance, will help us understand and explain reality, they transcend to theoretical status when they are confronted with that reality using data and empirical techniques.

We start with a conjecture or hypothesis and then interrogate that supposition with the data.

I don’t want to get into the eternal debates in the philosophy of science about falsification and the like. Suffice to say, I am not a Popperian (falsification) and lean more to the ideas of Imre Lakatos (but not his anti-Marxism British phase!) and even Paul Feyerband.

A body of thought often doesn’t subject itself to empirical scrutiny because it is inherently untestable – it represents a sort of core faith – the ‘hard core’ of the research program in the Lakatosian sense.

Surrounding that ‘hard core’ is a ‘protective belt of auxilliary hypotheses’, which taken together constitute a falsifiable theory.

But the practice of refutation (empirical scrutiny) might conclude that the theory (the ‘hard core’ and the ‘auxilliary hypothesis’ together) produce false empirical predictions (see below) but then we have a dilemma.

Does the empirical prediction failure lead to a rejection of the ‘theory’ or just an alteration of the ‘auxilliary hypotheses’?

Scientific communities are very reluctant to jettison their ‘hard core’ when they can simply alter the ‘protective belt’.

But, ultimately, too many empirical failures, spawns counter paradigms, which eventually supplant the dominant program.

And so it goes.”

Ingelesez “But all those rabbit holes aside, what is obvious is that even though research and theorising in the social sciences must involved empirical confrontation, it is quite different to the natural or physical sciences because we study humans in uncontrollable situations.

That means the way we proceed and the types of conclusions we draw are quite different. There are no ‘laws’ in economics as their are in physics, for example.

This has been a debate within economics for decades.

The mainstream like to think they are doing ‘science’ akin to the way a physicist does science. This gives them a sense of authority, which they use to parade over the masses, and tell them that certain propositions are non-contestable.

They even call some of their conjectures – ‘Laws’ – for example, the so-called Law of Diminishing Returns, which is a pillar in the propositions that mass unemployment is the result of excessive real wages and, hence, cuts are required to cure it.

To hide the ideology, they invented a ‘Law’.

While gravity is a law founded on measurable physical relationships, this mainstream economics ‘Law’ is just an assertion, which, because of its conceptualisation and abstraction (marginal analysis), bears little relationship to real world practices and is inherently ‘untestable’ as a conjecture.

The real world doesn’t look as though the ‘Law’ could be applicable in most situations (certainly outside of agricultural applications).

Ingelesez: “So we understand that economics is a social science and is contestable as a result.

A theory is thus a logical ordering of linked conjectures about the real world.

A theory will typically have several components.

1. Definitions and concepts – which describe or delineate key components that make up the theory – so concepts such as national income, unemployment, trade etc

These concepts will be defined in particular ways and often, in economics, related to in an accounting manner.

So total output (GDP) is equal to the sum of the expenditure flow on final goods and services in some particular period.

There are a number of definitions and concepts required to make that statement operational.

2. Functional or behavioural relations – which take the important variables (concepts) and write out how they interact.

What drives what? And to what effect?

This stage of the theory requires us to make assumptions as a way of adding some control to the analysis and to develop conjectures (hypotheses).

3. Predictions and shocks – we then ‘shock’ the behavioral relationships that make up our ‘theory’ by changing values of variables or the parameters linking them in the behavioural specification and make predictions as to what happens to some or all of the variables (the ‘system’).

That is what I think of as a process of theorising.

A theory transcends a conjecture when it has empirical congruency.

So if we say that if national income rises by a dollar, household consumption will rise but not by a dollar – that is a conjecture.

If it turns out that the conjecture is what happens in the real world, then we have a theory that is congruent.

Ingelesez: “Predictive accuracy – congruency

When we undertake empirical research in economics using the techniques derived from mathematical statistics and econometrics we are not searching for truth but congruency with the data.

Congruency means that an explanation is currently the tentatively most adequate in terms of helping us understand the dynamics of the data of the real world.

There is a lot of misconception about that.

A congruent body of ideas should also have some predictive confidence, although cannot withstand sudden regime shifts the push the data in unpredictable ways.

I wrote about those themes some years ago and this 2007 Working Paper (a revised version of a paper I wrote in May 1995) – Econometrics, Realism and Policy in Post Keynesian Economics – covers some of the discussion. This paper was subsequently published in a modified form but this version is free to all.

The point of the paper was to oppose the view by so-called Post Keynesian realists who eschewed any serious empirical work in economics on the grounds of fundamental uncertainty.

I argued that econometric research and practice is a necessary part of a paradigm which ultimately emphasises policy intervention.

I argued that, without negating the existence of fundamental uncertainty, the demands of policy can be accommodated and the utility of econometrics justified within a satisficing environment where rules of thumb and habits create a stable context for decision making.

If you take the fundamental uncertainty line to its logical conclusion you end up with a nihilism, which would appear to be at odds with an interventionist policy emphasis.

Following the great George Schackle, it is true that “we simply do not know” about the future but we make guesses about it and try to calibrate those guesses based upon what we do know – humans behave habitually, hunt in packs, etc.

Fundamental uncertainty only prevents us from ever discovering, knowingly, the truth and therefore the best solution.

As a result, people and institutions thus search for adequate solutions to their problems. In the institutionalist literature this has been called satisficing. When we discuss satisficing the role of rules of thumb and habits emerges

It is not the existence of uncertainty which is important, but rather the ways in which people in the economy deal with its existence.

So when I talk about predictive accuracy, I’m not talking about knowing the future or establishing truth. Rather, I’m talking about congruency.

And I think it is without doubt that economists who see the world through an MMT lens have been much more successful in making statements about future events, particularly following major policy interventions, then our mainstream colleagues.

The latter have what can be called an appalling record of congruency.”

Ingelesez: “There was a great article in The Week last month (August 14, 2018) by Ryan CooperThe biggest policy mistake of the last decade – which took his readers through a sequence of forecasting blunders by significant mainstream economists after the GFC.

He notes the predictions of Alberto Alesina and Silvia Ardagna, Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, apart from having “major conceptual problems”, “got everything wrong” about the real world.

You also cites “a bunch of conservative financial and economics luminaries, including Michael Boskin, John Cogan, Niall Ferguson, Kevin Hassett, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Bill Kristol, and John Taylor” were also raising alarm bells about inflation following the fiscal stimulus in the US:

Yet it’s been six to eight years since their arguments and there’s hardly been a glimmer of the kind of inflation they warned about.

In fact, not only has there been no hyperinflation, inflation has consistently come in under the Fed’s supposed target value of 2 percent.

He lists over major blunders by the mainstream doomsayers.

I discussed some of these issues in this blog post – MMT predicts well – Groupthink in action (February 6, 2017).”

Ingelesez: “Abstraction

Abstraction is an important part of theorising. We cannot simply have a theory of everything (easily!). So we simplify.

In itself simplification is not a reason to criticise a theoretical structure. So attacking neoclassical ‘theory’ because involves highly abstracted assumptions to be tractable is not the reason we reject it.

We reject it, for example, because the predictions it makes about human behaviour, which are based on their highly simplistic set of axioms about human behaviour, simply do not explain reality.

Psychologists just laugh at the promotion of Homo Economicus (the basis of neoclassical theory about the individual) by mainstream economists.

We should also understand that in macroeconomics there are many abstract concepts.

If you think about it (and understand it), the entire body of macroeconomics is an abstraction.

There is no such thing as a “price level” in the aggregate, or a household. The aggregates are the sum of the parts.

So that sort of abstraction is not the reason to criticise a body of work.

However, if those abstractions, taken together, lead to predictions that are just ridiculous, then one can reject the ‘theory’.

For example, New Keynesian macroeconomics did not even have the banking sector included before the GFC. It could never explain the reality that unfolded as a consequence.

Ingelesez: “Now why is there a T in MMT?

At the outset, we have to be careful not to conflate theory with new. A body of work can be considered to be a theory even if in putting together that body of work there was no new theorising involved.

In the case of MMT there is a substantial body of ‘theory’ that we inherited from past schools of thought and integrated into a MMT framework.

The standing on the shoulders of giants syndrome!

Now, lets start thinking about theory in the MMT context.

Here is a simple example.

An oft-stated claim is that MMT is about accounting relationships. Well in part it certainly is. It is part of the stock-flow tradition in heterodox economics that ensures consistency between flows of things and the stocks they flow into, period to period.

I wrote about that in this blog post – Stock-flow consistent macro models (September 8, 2009).

Those who make that spurious claim about MMT often use the sectoral balances framework to make their point.”

10 Ingelesez: “They note that the basic sectoral balances relationship, which is a core part of the way an MMT economist analyses the world, is, at heart an accounting truism that has to be true because it is derived from a larger accounting framework – the nation’s National Accounts.

That is true so far.

While I know there is a debate in accounting about the theory of accounting, we will accept, here, that an accounting truism is one that has to be true (add up in this case) by the way we define it. It is not opinion or conjecture – it just has to be.

So the statement: the Government deficit (surplus) equals the Non-government surplus (deficit) dollar-for-dollar is such a truism.

It must be true.

By introducing this truism into the economic debate, MMT proponents have been able to alter the way people think about government deficits and surpluses and that sparks interesting new insights and options.

So when a mainstream economist or a politician that is mouthing that same economist rails against deficits and says surpluses represent national saving and putting money into the piggy bank for the future, anyone who understands MMT knows automatically that surpluses destroy non-government financial wealth (through the fiscal squeeze).

They further know that a currency-issuing government doesn’t ‘save’ in the sense that a household saves by postponing consumption to generate higher consumption possibilities in the future.

A financially-constrained household has to save to achieve that goal.

A currency-issuing government can spend whenever it wants as long as there are things for sale in its own currency, irrespective of what it did last period.

A fiscal surplus provides such a government with no extra capacity to spend in the future.

So a simple truism has a powerful effect if understood correctly.”

11 Ingelesez: “But we can go much further than that.

When we write out the sectoral balances equation as:

[(S – I) – CAD] = (G – T)

We know the term on the left-hand side [(S – I) – CAD] is the non-government sector financial balance and is of equal and opposite sign to the government financial balance.

So if (G – T) > 0 (a fiscal deficit) then it has to be true that [(S – I) – CAD] > 0 (a non-government surplus).

Further, if (G – T) increases (that is, a larger fiscal deficit), then the non-government surplus has to increase.

These propositions are true by definition.

Further, if there is a current account deficit (CAD < 0), and the private domestic sector start to save overall (S – I > 0) then the government deficit has to become larger and if the government tries to resist that fall in non-government spending, then national income will fall and the fiscal deficit will become even larger still.

This statement goes beyond the inherent sectoral balances accounting.

Focus on the part of that statement – “national income will fall”.

The interesting question is what drives the movements in the components of the sectoral balances such that they always obey the accounting truism?

That is where we need theory!

12 Ingelesez: “Remember that the derivation of the sectoral balances comes out of the basic income-expenditure framework that is a core part of MMT (inherited from earlier Keynesian theory).

We know that expenditure drives income through output creation.

In the national accounts, the sources of expenditure are:

1. Household consumption expenditure (C)

2. Investment expenditure (I)

3. Government expenditure (G)

4. Exports (X) less Imports (M) – or Net Exports (X – M)

We can clearly write out accounting relationships (and identities) about these variables such as

(1) GDP = C + I + G + (X – M)

which says that total national income (GDP) is the sum of total final consumption spending (C), total private investment (I), total government spending (G) and net exports (X – M).

Expression (1) tells us that total income in the economy per period will be exactly equal to total spending from all sources of expenditure.

But that begs the question, what determines (explains) these components (C, I, G, X, M)?

To answer that question, we need theories about the behaviour which determines how much and when a household or business firm will spend.

We need theories of government spending.

We need theories about the way trade operates to determine exports and imports.

We also know that when the government taxes total income, households are left with disposable income. That is just an accounting statement.

Then households make choices on how to use that disposable income – to consume and by construction (as a residual) to save. For the individual household total saving becomes a behavioural choice. We need a theory to explain that.”

13 Ingelesez: “In the most simple MMT expenditure model (which we inherited) we say that

1. C is a function of disposable income. That seems like a very simple statement. But it is a conjecture that can become theory if it stacks up against the data.

More advanced studies try to work out the nature of the relationship between C and (Y – T) and a number of competing theories are out there (Permanent Income Hypothesis, Relative Income Hypothesis, Life Cycle Hypothesis and more).

We might try to work out how wealth (a stock) impacts on consumption expenditure (a flow).

2. I is a function of the cost of funds (interest rate), expected revenue (proxied by some function of income) and other non-linear type of impacts (irreversibility etc).

And so it goes. I won’t rehearse all the theories for G, X and M (only M is considered in the simple model to be a function of income and real exchange rates).

So while the sectoral balances equation as an accounting identity provides some interesting insights in its own right, the really interesting times begin when we place the equation in a dynamic setting to analysis what happens if.

The ‘if’ being a change in the one or more component and the way those changes evolve over time by reverberating through the theoretical linkages between the components.

And by theorising we understand how national income changes bring the economy into a state that we account for.”

14 Ingelesez: “Thus, if private domestic sector households decide to cut consumption expenditure, what happens next?

We need our theory to trace the consequences through!

Firms notice inventory build up. They don’t produce to store goods and servies. They produce to sell.

So they start to cut production – first by cutting working hours (shifts, intensity etc) then, if the expenditure decline cements itself, they start laying of labour.

Incomes fall and this reverberates into further reductions in expenditure.

Soon enough the firms form a view that expected future revenue from sales is lower than previously expected and so they cut investment plans.

And this creates further expenditure shocks and so on.

Our theory tells us that the national income changes that follow these expenditure adjustments impact on:

1. C – it falls.

2. S (household saving) – it falls because it is linked to income.

3. I – it falls.

4. T (taxes) – they fall because they are linked to economic activity (income generation).

5. M (imports) – they fall because they are linked to economic activity (income generation).

6. G – it is likely to rise because welfare payments through income support systems rise.

And so you can see that the national income changes drive shifts in the financial balances for each sector.

At all times in this adjustment path, the accounting relationship we call the sectoral balances equation is satisfied.

Eventually, when the economy reaches a new equilibrium (an abstraction), which just means the national income changes from the expenditure shock finally become zero, we reach a new set of sectoral balances.

But we needed theory to explain how we got from one steady state to the next one following a shock.

Of course, in the real world, there are shocks occuring continuously, and it is hard to isolate them.

But that doesn’t alter the point.”

15 Ingelesez: “I could talk about other examples of how ‘theory’ is a core part of what we call MMT.

I discussed the ridiculous proposition that MMT has no inflation theory in this blog post – I wonder what the hell I have been writing all these years (February 12, 2013).

The same character who made the original assertions that MMT had ignored inflation is still making the claims – he is just a serial nuisance.

(…) MMT has an elaborate theory of inflation embedded within it.

(…) our textbook, (…) contains 3 chapters which develop that theory in contradistinction to the mainstream theory.

We inherited some of the ‘inflation’ theory that is now part of the core MMT body of work. But some of it is new.

I can claim some credit there personally as key propositions from my PhD (buffer stocks etc) are now part of that inflation approach and represent a ‘new’ way of thinking about the relationship between unemployment and inflation.

MMT replaces the mainstream Phillips curve with an employment buffer stock.”



Kontzeptuen indarra…

Mandanga versus autodeterminazioa (Autodeterminazio-eskubideaz eta ziaboga ideologikoaz)

Hitzak ari bira dugun egina… (gure Etxeparek)


Katalunian, Arenys de Munten-en:

Kataluniaren independentziari buruzko galdeketa Arenys de Munten (https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kataluniaren_independentziari_buruzko_galdeketa_Arenys_de_Munten)

Autodeterminazioaren aldeko Arenyseko Mugimenduak (MAPA) bultzatutako udalerri mailako herri-galdeketa bat izan zen. Galdeketa 2009ko irailaren 13an gauzatu zen Arenys de Munten (Maresme, Katalunia). Galdeketa horretan honako galdera egin zitzaien Arenyseko biztanleei: «Ados al zaude Katalunia zuzenbide Estatu independente, demokratiko eta sozial bat bilakatzearekin, Europako Batasunaren barruan?»[1].”

[1] Galdeketan erabilitako protokoloa


Baskongadetan: Donostian

Presentan la pregunta para la consulta de Gure Esku Dago en Donostia en 18 de noviembre

«¿Quieres que la ciudadanía vasca decida su futuro político por sí misma y libremente? (sic)»

Como no hay nada más (sic)”… —> Échale sekulebedarra!

Alegia, —> Euskal Errepublika? 2.222garren urterako!

Autonomismoa versus independentzia

Ikus Biharamuna…

Para ensanchar la base” (sic), alegia, autonomismoa (PNV + EH Bildu + GED) versus independentzia (egungo Katalunian gertatzen ari dena)



Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (2)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (3)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (4)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (5)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (6)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (7)

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (8)

Euskal Herriarentzat:

Zer gertatu da 2012tik 2017ra? Zergatik?

Lezo Urreiztieta, santurtziarra

Ikus Martin Ugalde-ren Lezo Urreiztieta, Elkar, 1990.


(i) Urreiztieta connection


(ii) Josu Martinez: «No se puede ser héroe y buena persona»


(iii) El increíble vasco que proyectó Euskadi en una isla mexicana


(iv) Jainkoak ez dit barkatzen | Josu Martinezen dokumentala

(v) Dios no me perdona | Un documental de Josu Martinez

(vi) Bideoa: https://www.eitb.eus/eu/telebista/programak/ahoz-aho/bideoak/osoa/5850558/bideoa-josu-martinez-jainkoak-ez-dit-barkatzen-filma-aurkezten/


Euskal Errepublikaz?


Presentan la pregunta para la consulta de Gure Esku Dago en Donostia en 18 de noviembre

«¿Quieres que la ciudadanía vasca decida su futuro político por sí misma y libremente? (sic)»

Échale sekulebedarra!: Autodeterminazio-eskubidea (eta Tolin Eguzkitza)

Astoak aharrantzaka, berriz!

Euskal Errepublika? 2.222garren urterako!

Bienbitartean, “como no hay nada más (sic)”… segituko dute mandangaz aritzen!

España, aparta de mi este cáliz (César Vallejo)

(Caveat: ez naiz James Petras-en zalea, ezta izango ere! Baina España una, grande y libre-n gertatu zenaz, eta bizi genuenaz jabetzeko, hona hemen hari interesgarri bat…)

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo


Buenas tardes, hoy quiero hablaros de James Petras, y principalmente del informe que realizó para el CSIC. En esta ocasión os presento el Informe Petras: Dos Generaciones de Trabajadores Españoles. Un buen retrato de la estrategia de modernización del PSOE de Felipe González

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Lo interesante de este trabajo es que es de 1995 y consigue dar en el clavo de muchos problemas que esta habiendo en la actualidad o que se han agravado con la liberalización económica. Es por ello que considero imprescindible su lectura para cualquier estudioso de izquierdas

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Antes de entrar en materia quiero presentar al Señor Petras. De origen griego, este sociólogo estadounidense ha dedicado su vida casi en su totalidad el estudio de temas como la lucha de clases o imperialismo. Ha colaborado con Noam Chomsky y solía escribir en la New Left Review

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Tiene numerosos libros escritos (muchos de ellos están en español) y ha dado conferencias por todo el mundo. Para mi gusto es un intelectual poco conocido en España, a pesar del gran trabajo que hizo cuando estuvo estudiando la sociedad de clases española

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Este trabajo pasó de ser un trabajo teórico a uno mucho mas humano, Petras comenzó accediendo a datos y estadísticas publicas, pero pronto empezó a ver que la realidad material tenía unos matices que en los documentos no encontraba, escogió seguir esa senda

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Entonces, junto a esa batería de datos obtuvo unos testimonios de personas de distintas edades que nos permite ver la sociedad de clases de la época de la modernización de Felipe González y el PSOE de 1980. Centró su trabajo de campo en las diferentes generaciones de trabajadores

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Tras la introducción, voy a tratar de sintetizar la información que da Petras en su informe de manera esquematizada

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

La estrategia de modernización se centró en tres ámbitos: liberalización de la economía, la entrada de España en la división internacional del trabajo y la configuración de un nuevo régimen regulador.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Para llevar a cabo estas tres metas, se realizaron decisiones y políticas encaminadas a ello, no fue un fenómeno que vino solo, entre estas decisiones están: privatización de empresas publicas y banca, libreconvertibilidad y la flexibilización del mercado laboral

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Con la entrada de España en la Comunidad Europea se ahondó en la división internacional del trabajo. Es por ello que España tuvo que especializarse en diversos ámbitos de la economía, dejando de poder competir en otros

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Principalmente en España esto supuso la expansión del sector servicios, principalmente el turismo, y dejó de ser competitiva industrialmente, supuestamente porque no podía competir con la de otros países.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Petras también percibió que el capital extranjero se dedicó a comprar empresas españolas, pero al revés esto no ocurrió, convirtiéndose España en un espacio donde las multinacionales extranjeras podían tener trabajadores con salarios bajos

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Lo anteriormente descrito junto con el nuevo régimen regulador fomentó la desnacionalización de la economía. Según Petras, en España la liberalización económica no significa desregulación, sino un cambio normativo beneficioso a que empresas extranjeras se asienten en España

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Estas reformas se realizaron mediante decretos ley, lo cual desconectó a la ciudadanía con el Estado, que no consultaba nada con los principales perjudicados de sus acciones, ademas de una sensación de corrupción que comenzó a extenderse

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Esto se materializó en un gran aumento del trabajo eventual frente al indefinido, menor organización social y sindical y un aumento entre la diferencia de renta entre el capital y el trabajo

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Este nuevo régimen regulador beneficia a empresas extranjeras frente a nacionales y al sector servicios sobre el capital productivo. Por ello aumenta el paro (desindustrialización), las desigualdades entre trabajadores fijos y temporales y entre regiones (estacionalidad)

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Según Petras, durante la época franquista el trabajo tendía a ser el mismo de por vida si uno quería o no tenía problemas con la dictadura. Esto daba seguridad y certidumbre en la vida. La preocupación nº1 de los jóvenes era esa, el trabajo.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Con esto Petras no defendía a la dictadura franquista, pero si ponía en relieve que la estabilidad laboral permitía a los trabajadores luchar por un mejor salario (años 70/tardofranquismo) y asentar una vida formando una familia

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Frente a esto teníamos a una generación de jóvenes indefensos, que no iban a formar ningún vinculo social en su circulo de trabajo porque normalmente no les daba tiempo para ello. Además de que no permite luchar por una mejora salarial que sus padres si consiguieron

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Ahora llegamos a la parte que mas interesante me parece del Informe Petras. Si tan mal estaban las cosas. ¿Qué hacía la izquierda? Su respuesta recuerda mucho a lo que ocurre actualmente. Lean con detenimiento esos fragmentos, porque la similitud con la actualidad asusta

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Si a eso le sumamos que ahora los activistas son trabajadores de “lo suyo”, lo que Petras mencionaba por aquel entonces me recuerda mucho al lío que se ha formado en torno al libro publicado por @diasasaigonados.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

El informe acaba con una serie de entrevistas biográficas semi-estructuradas en los que los trabajadores de distintas generaciones ponen en relieve sus miedos, sus aspiraciones, su relación con los sindicato.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Espero que los testimonios de Petras no sean tomados como un halago a la política franquista, sino un halago a las organizaciones obreras que ya en los 70s podían presionar para mejorar sus vidas. Yo lo considero más bien una crítica feroz al gobierno de Felipe González

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Os dejo con las conclusiones a las que llegaba el autor, él lo explicará mucho mejor que yo, yo solo expongo lo que este gran sociólogo estudió

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Este documento está en internet, en @revistajoblanco para comprar. Búsquenlo para leerlo porque lo que se explica es mucho más extenso y detallado de lo que yo he esbozado aquí.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Quiero que se comprenda que lo ocurrido con la deriva económica del país no fue una catástrofe, sino que se decidió que fuese así desde las élites políticas socialistas

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Aquí tienen al principal culpable de ello. Carlos Solchaga, el ministro que afirmó: “la mejor política industrial es la que no existe“. De aquellos polvos, estos lodos…

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Y si la izquierda no es la principal crítica con esta situación lo será el populismo de derechas, y es ahí donde nos quieren, luchando en batallas culturales mientras deshacen el pais a su antojo

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Os quiero dejar con este fragmento de vídeo, fue viéndolo que por primera vez escuché el nombre del informe y decidí buscarlo

Bideoa: Julio Anguita (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb6tIuqTlcU)

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

¿Lo más “gracioso”? Que el informe fue pagado y se silenció sus recomendaciones y críticas, tanto por el PSOE como por los gobiernos que lo sucedieron, que lo ignoraron en su totalidad, pareciese que no querían reconocer la realidad. Un saludo y buenas tardes!

AnaKarrie‏ @Anakarrie ira. 17

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

yo aún lo conservo, la publicacion en papel me refiero. Gracias por el hilo!

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Muchas gracias a ti por leerlo. Y conserva ese documento, tiene bastante valor académico. Un saludo!!

Miguel Angel Munuera‏ @Munuerama ira. 17

En los 90 estudiábamos ese documento en La @UJCE

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 17

Pues actualmente no sé si lo leerán, pero deberían. Sobre todo la parte que va dedicada a los progresistas


?☭‏ @Ansotegi1 ira. 18

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

Completa la lectura con éste ?

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo ira. 18

Lo buscaré en internet a ver si lo encuentro. Tiene muy buena pinta, muchas gracias!!

Sergio‏ @tri33s

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

Este informe aún lo conservo, para mi fue una referencia en los 90, estudiaba sociología y a la vez me incorporé al mundo laboral accediendo a trabajos temporales.

Sergio‏ @tri33s

No te puedes imaginar la frustración que sentía, sintiéndome comunista, no tenía el modo de defenderme de mi precariedad laboral,conviviendo con trabajadores sindicados que se aferraban a sus derechos fordistas y no hacian nada por aglutinar luchas a favor de los que llegabamos.

Manuel Buñuel‏ @Mbunleo

El problema es que actualmente estamos aún peor en el tema de la flexibilidad laboral. Y la izquierda aún parece que no consigue adaptarse a ello

Sergio‏ @tri33s

Así es, cada vez peor. Hay luchas sectoriales como en Amazon por ejemplo, pero se quedan aisladas y pierden fuerza pues no hay un posicionamiento claro desde la izquierda institucional etc

TeresadelaFe‏ @TeresadelaFe ira. 18

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

Gracias por el hilo. Es impecable.

LaLokomotora.com‏ @La_Lokomotora ira. 17

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

Todo un clásico de los 90

Alberto‏ @alberto_collado ira. 18

Honi erantzuten: @Mbunleo

Gracias por el hilo y por recordarnos uno de los informes más lúcidos del contexto que generó la mierda a la que ahora estamos sometidos

Horrela uler daiteke Ibar Ezkerreko gaur egungo egoera larria, Santurtzitik hasi eta Bilboraino gertatutakoa, non PSOE eta UGT nagusi izan diren urteetan.

Enpresetan, udaletan eta nonahi izan duten kontrola eta lanpostuen banaketaren bidez, den dena basamortu bilakatu dute!

Horrela ulertzen da PSOE-koen ‘miraria’ gure lurraldean, UGT eta CC.OO.-koen laguntzarekin!!

Horiek izan dira, Franco eta gero, gure esparruan egon diren benetako eskuindarrak, hala ekonomian nola politikan (erabat anti abertzaleak izanik: lehen, orain eta etorkizunean).

¿Cómo quieres que yo sea vasco y español a un tiempo…? —> Ibar Ezkerreko kanta

Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (8)

Hasierarako, ikus Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak, Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (2), Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (3), Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (4), Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (5), Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (6) eta Katalunia: strong opinions, iritzi sendoak (7)


(i) Màsters


Bernat Dedéu

(…) tot això de la vanitat acadèmica sempre m’ha produït molta folgança. De fet, aquesta setmana m’ho he passat de conya veient com alguns professors de la privada catalana sense doctorat, d’aquells que duen anys escalfant cadira a les nostres benignes institucions pel sol mèrit de tenir carnet polític, es dedicaven a escarnir Pablo Casado per no haver fet no sé quin coi de treballs. També m’ha fet molta il·lusió pensar en els més de deu diputats del nostre il·lustre Parlament a qui un bon amic va escriure la tesi pel mòdic preu de vint mil pepinos. Ai, la moral!

Però tot això és soroll i espectacle, perquè la cosa important d’aquestes picabaralles d’acadèmia ha estat veure com l’afer dels màsters ha ajudat a disfressar quelcom molt més interessant, com ara la baralla infantil entre el PDeCAT i Esquerra, posterior a la famosa moció sobre el diàleg-dins-la-llei a Madrid. Això sí que té gràcia, perquè –mentre un milió de catalans es manifestaven– els nostres representants polítics, tots ells abellits amb la samarreta republicana i cridant ni un pas enrere!, tenien la bona pensada de presentar al Congreso l’enèsima prova de com se’n carden del referèndum de l’1-O. Per si no n’hi havia prou, el conseller d’orfeons i casals a l’estranger ens recordava que això de la vida unilateral, doncs que per demà passat potser sí però que ara-no-toca (qui t’ho havia de dir, Ernest, que acabaries parlant com un convergent).

Mentre tothom xerrava de màsters i doctorats, ja ho veieu, era més fàcil anar colant el llenguatge de la rendició al dissortat poble que, amb una capacitat de paciència envejable, omplia els carrers com li demanava la seva classe política. Per salpebrar-ho tot i fer-ho una mica més sòrdid, només calia que s’hi afegís la nostra híper-alcaldessa, recordant-nos que ella havia estat temptada amb el suborn acadèmic per obra i maldat d’una directiva de multinacional, ai Jesús!, però que havia preferit continuar sense carrera a tenir-la fraudulentament. Quanta conya, quanta comèdia, tot plegat! Però aneu-vos-hi acostumant, que per tal de dissimular la negligència diària, els polítics catalans s’exercitaran en el seu doctorat particular d’inventiva i de cinisme durant els propers anys. Ja ho veureu: acabarem enyorant aquell temps benigne en què els polítics eren com Montilla, sense cap títol.

Dit sigui de pas, companys de l’ANC. Si voleu que l’alcaldessa de Barcelona tingui més temps per dedicar-se a acabar la carrera, podríeu començar a pressionar per les primàries municipals que els vostres propis socis van votar per impulsar. Si no és molèstia i l’ANC ha de servir per a quelcom més que fer manis, evidentment…”

(ii) Condemnat al passat


Bernat Dedéu

Saps del cert que un règim polític arriba a la seva decadència total quan només és capaç de reivindicar el passat i vomita nostàlgia. Així s’esdevé en aquest temps nostre tan espantós, el de la Segona Transició a l’autonomisme, un present en què tots aquells que ens vàrem criar convivint amb el pujolisme admirem petrificats com el país que crèiem haver deixat enrere torna a emergir en àmbits com ara la cultura o la comunicació. Hi pensava dijous passat mentre mirava l’estrena d’Els meus pares, flamantíssim retorn als mitjans de la tribu de Gemma Nierga i exemple d’una televisió vetusta, de folklore i barretina, de ratafia estètica i tres pics i repicó, però nociva sobretot perquè tufeja a aquella filosofia tan pujolista de relegar la vida dels catalans a la supervivència familiar i a la contemplació del paisatge mentre els mines qualsevol capacitat d’iniciativa política i els encastes a l’inconscient que la independència del país és un somni.

Pels que hagin fet l’ESO i no sàpiguen de què collons parlo, recordaré simplement que el pujolisme consistí en un art particular de fer xantatge emocional als catalans mitjançant el qual l’excels Molt Honorable va dedicar-se a pactar amb els espanyols un nivell raonable de competències polítiques, d’autarquia econòmica (i corrupció) al preu de folkloritzar l’independentisme per fer creure a la ciutadania que, en cas d’intentar autodeterminar-se, els espanyols els massacrarien a hòsties. Aquest mateix i exacte xantatge va retornar els dies posteriors a l’1-O, copypastejat en el fet que no s’apliqués la independència sota l’excusa d’evitar escenes de violència al carrer i amb la possibilitat d’una mediació internacional del conflicte a escala europea. A hores d’ara, sabem que aquella intervenció de la UE no existia, i que el conflicte als carrers ha augmentat precisament quan la política ha abandonat el Parlament i s’ha abocat a una autogestió nefasta de manis i contra-manis.

Fa dies que circula per la xarxa un vídeo de la passada Diada on Quim Torra, xerrant amb uns visitants del Palau de la Generalitat als qui fa de guia, afirma: “Europa ens ajudarà quan fem allò que no vam fer el 27 d’octubre: defensar la República”. La idea té certa gràcia: primer, perquè el 131 està admetent amb força claredat que la classe política independentista va declarar la República sense cap mena d’intenció de fortificar-se en les institucions catalanes ni de defensar allò que els ciutadans havien votat. Però sobretot, en segon terme, perquè el president hipoteca la iniciativa dels catalans al caràcter mediador de la Unió Europea, una intervenció que no va existir després de l’1-O, amb tot el nivell d’empoderament que l’independentisme havia guanyat en aquell instant, i que ara, com sap perfectament, no arriba ni a la centèsima possibilitat de realització.

Parlar de retenir el control de les institucions mentre la teva consellera de Presidència viatja regularment a Madrid per tal de tender puentes forma part de tota aquesta retòrica abrandada que, com en temps de l’excels, sempre acaba amb un gest d’abaixar el cap; això sí, dissimulat amb un grandíssim memorial de greuges i una mirada a l’infinit. Però la culpa no és dels polítics, sinó de qui algun dia ens empassàrem el seu altíssim grau de fantasia i d’incompliments. Espero que el moviment de primàries per a les següents municipals oxigeni una mica la nostra vida política (tot i que cada vegada soc més pessimista, car ni l’ANC les defensa, encara que els seus socis votessin impulsar-les), perquè en cas contrari tot això acabarà fent-se irrespirable. Jo, per si de cas, no encenc gaire la televisió, temorós que m’hi torni a sortir el Bassas amb cabell i acompanyat de la Vicenteta.”

Bienbitartean Euskal Herrian mandanga nagusi eta nonahi, ….

Edo eta are okerragoa: «El juicio debería ser una palanca para la confrontación democrática»

Zeintzuk dira okerragoak egindako galderak ala emandako erantzunak?

Mon dieu!!!! A ze parea!!!

Egingo ote diote inoiz EHko super kazetari mandangazaleek elkarrizketaren bat Bernat Dedéuri, Kataluniako egoeraz jabetzeko?

Ez dakit zergatik susmatzen dudan ezetz, ez diotela egingo!

Lehman Brothers delakoaz: ez dugu ezer ulertu, ezta ikasi ere ez!

Bill Mitchell-en Precarious private balance sheets driven by fiscal austerity is the problem


(i) Kazetariak1

(ii) Matt Taibbi2

(iii) Oso gutxi ikasi dugu3

(iv) Elise J. Beans4

(a) ‘PSI’5

(b) “Deconstructing the Financial Crisis”6

(c) Big banks7

(v) Eskandaloak8

(vi) Afera legalak9

(vii) Ekonomilariak erabat galduta, Martin Feldstein10

(viii) Bill Mitchell 2010ean eta 2016an: moneta jaulkitzaileko gobernuak eta defizitak11

(ix) Espazioa fiskalaz12

(x) Diru Teoria Modernoa (DTM) eta krisia13

(xi) Laburbilduz14

Gehigarria: Australiako kasuaz

Household debt at elevated levels in Australia

In recent weeks, there has been more discussion about the elevated levels of household debt in Australia.


Ondorioak (bereziki Australiari dagozkionak)

(1)… this discussion that is lost in the mainstream media.

(2) A government surplus is exactly equal to the non-government deficit.

(3) Taking more out of the expenditure and income generating stream (via taxation) than is being put in (by government spending) forces the non-government sector into a state of liquidity squeeze.

(4) It can maintain expenditure growth for a time by running down saving (as it is) and increasing borrowing (as it is).

(5) But that cannot last, especially as the growth in asset values that have driven the debt start to taper off.

(6) But as long as the financial press doesn’t make the link between what is going in the fiscal space with what is going on with respect to non-government debt and asset prices we will see this dichotomised discussion.

(7) The right-wingers will rave on about public debt and the evils of deficits.

(8) The others will rave on about the dangers of household debt.

(9) Neither will realise or articulate the idea that to provide some security to the non-government sector, it is likely that the government sector will have to run continuous fiscal deficits.


Nahita sortu zuten krisia

Krisia? Zer krisi mota?

Krisiaz, berriz

Krisia nahita izan da induzitua

Krisia: ikusiz nola etorri zen…

Finantza krisia: historia sekretua

Krisia: nondik zetorren, zerk bultzatua, nortzuek aurreikusi zuten edo nor den nor

Krisia: nahita induzitua

Krisia: galdera zuzena

2007ko krisia (GFK): zein zen kausa?

Ingelesez: “The media has been giving a lot of attention in the last week to the 10-year anniversary of the Lehman Brothers crash which occurred on September 15, 2008 and marked the realisation, after months of denial, that there was a financial crisis underway. Lots of articles have been published recently about what we have learned from this historical episode.”

Ingelesez: “I thought that the Rolling Stone article by Matt Taibbi (September 13, 2018) – Ten Years After the Crash, We’ve Learned Nothing – pretty much summed it up.”

Ingelesez: “We have learned very little. Commentators still construct the crisis as a sovereign debt problem and demand that governments reduce fiscal deficits to give them ‘space’ to defend the economy in the next crisis. They are also noting that the balance sheets of the non-government sector components – households and firms – are looking rather precarious. They also tie that in with flat wages growth and a run down in household saving. But the link between the fiscal data and the non-government borrowing data is never made. So we are moving headlong into the next crisis with very little understanding of the relationship between government and non-government. And we are increasingly relying on private sector debt buildup to fund growth as governments retreat. Everything about that is wrong.”

Ingelesez: “The recently published book – Financial Exposure: Carl Levin’s Senate Investigations into Finance and Tax Abuse (Palgrave Macmillan) by Elise J. Bean is worth reading. Elise Bean was an investigative lawyer for the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI).

The book recounts the workings of the PSI.”

5 Ingelesez: ” We read that the PSI has:

faced down corrupt bankers, arrogant executives, and sleazy lawyers. We’d confronted tax dodgers of all stripes, from billionaires to multinationals. We’d interviewed crooks in prison, North Korean representatives, and tax have operatives. We’d protected whistleblowers, championed victims, and defended honest government employees battling abuses. We’d stood up to dirty tricks, assaults on PSI’s bipartisanship, and attacks on our bosses.

Never was this environment more loaded than when they started looking into the financial services sector.”

Ingelesez: “The chapter on “Deconstructing the Financial Crisis” is particularly interesting, given the current attention the decade-anniversary is receiving.

Elise Bean writes that the investigation was “the longest, toughest inquiry” the PSI under Carl Levin had ever undertaken.

The “facts were tangled, the players powerful, and the stakes huge”.

She credits the legislative action that led to the “Dodd-Frank Act, the most extensive set of U.S. financial reforms in a generation” as the results of their investigation.

The book leaves no doubt as to what caused the GFC – and the train wreck of Lehmans and others had been gathering pace for a few decades as a result of the neoliberal-inspired deregulation and reduced oversight (mostly due to regulative capture).”

Ingelesez: “The crisis saw governments offer trillions [amerikar trilioia = europar bilioia] to the otherwise failed big banks and related institutions to keep them alive. Those bailouts have had long-term consequences that Matt Taibbi documents.

1. “a radical transformation of the economy”.

2. “Previously, small banks traditionally enjoyed a lending advantage because of their on-the-ground relationships with local businesses. But the effective merger of the state with giant, too-big-to-fail banks has tilted the advantage far in the other direction.”

3. “Big banks post-2008 could now borrow much more cheaply than smaller ones, because lenders no longer worried about them going out of business.”

4. “How much of the record $171.3 billion [amerikar bilioia = europar mila milioi] in profits earned by banks in 2017 was owed to the implicit guarantee?”

5. “The bank-state merger brokered 10 years ago this week socialized the risks of the financial sector, and essentially converted Wall Street into a vehicle for annually privatizing a big chunk of America’s GDP into the hands of a few executives.

And so on.”

Ingelesez: “But if we thought there might be a change in behaviour afterwards (for example, because of Dodd-Frank) we would be wrong.

The scandals have keep coming.

1. The 2010 “flash crash” of the New York Stock Exchange as a result of some rogue traders on Chicago’s derivatives exchange – see The 2010 ‘flash crash’: how it unfolded.

2. The LIBOR scandal – see Libor scandal: the bankers who fixed the world’s most important number rigging HSBC’s $850 million drug money-laundering fiasco

3. HSBC getting caught laundering drug money from Mexico, among other criminal acts – see – HSBC to pay $1.9 billion U.S. fine in money-laundering case

4. Australian readers who have been following the Royal Commission into the financial services sector will be able to catalogue a sequence of criminal acts by bankers, insurance companies etc. Charging fees for no service, cheating customers, etc.

I saw a Tweet last week listing the top 10 financial market players who had gone to prison for their criminal conduct.

The list looked like this (first three only):





In other words, no-one went to prison for their criminal behaviour.

In the recent German TV series, Bad Banks, the major character tells her boss who is about to go down for criminal behaviour that no-one at his level goes to prison.”

Ingelesez: “Matt Taibbi lists other legacy issues arising from the lax way governments dealt with the crisis.

1. “we made Too Big To Fail worse by making the companies even bigger and more dangerous”.

2. “The people responsible for the crisis weren’t just saved, but made beneficiaries of another decade of massive unearned profits”.

I was reading Elise Bean’s book around the same time I was alerted to an Irish Times article (September 13, 2018) – Trader blows €100m hole in Nasdaq’s Nordic power market – which reported that one of the highest earning Norwegian financial market trader had just severely compromised the “stability fund that ensures the safety of derivatives trading in European electricity markets.”


This character was betting on “European power markets” and:

saw his positions collapse on Monday after extreme market moves in German and Nordic energy markets … [he] … had defaulted on Tuesday after they were unable to meet margin calls at its clearing house on loss-making trades … [he] … blew through several layers of safeguards designed to protect it from such losses …

The size of the loss also ate up about two-thirds of a separate €166 million mutual default fund members must contribute to …

And “some of the biggest banks and energy traders such as Morgan Stanley, UBS and Equinor, Norway’s state oil company” will have to make up the losses to the clearing house.

Power is an essential service to communities. Yet, we still allow the financial market casino to bet on it and compromise the stability of the financial system as a consequence.

Enron went bankrupt in 2001.

Australia had power cuts in 2017 because the financial arms of the privatised (previously state-owned) energy companies arranged for generating capacity to be turned off so they could profit on the spikes in the energy prices.

And so it goes.”

10 Ingelesez: “And one of the most powerful narrative that still remains is somehow that governments have to pursue fiscal surpluses to safeguard our financial system – to give them the ammunition to defend the economy from meltdown.

Just this week, economists are coming out claiming there is no government capacity ‘left’ to prevent another crisis.

Remember Martin Feldstein’s appearance in the investigative movie – Inside Job – which the Director Charles Ferguson said was about “the systemic corruption of the United States by the financial services industry and the consequences of that systemic corruption.”

As a reminder, I considered his qualification to comment on macroeconomics in this blog post – Martin Feldstein should be ignored (May 3, 2011).

Feldstein, a Harvard economics professor, was a board member of AIG, which was paying massive fees in that role. He was also a board member of the subsidiary company that made all the credit default swaps that bankrupted AIG.

His appearance on the Inside Job was a classic example of the disgraceful hubris that the mainstream of my profession exuded then, and now.

He recently wrote a Wall Street Journal article (June 10, 2018) – The Fed Can’t Save Jobs From AI and Robots – which ran the line that Artificial Intelligence and Robots will create mass unemployment in the US (millions will become unemployed as a consequence) but the central bank should not deviate from maintaining low inflation.

His solution is that government should further deregulate the labour market (cut wages) rather than try to engage in demand stimulus to generate higher labour demand.

In an article published today (September 17, 2018) in the UK Daily Telegraph (but syndicated to Fairfax) – ‘We don’t have any strategy to deal with it’: experts warn next recession could rival the Great DepressionFeldstein is quoted as saying:

We have no ability to turn the economy around … When the next recession comes, it is going to be deeper and last longer than in the past. We don’t have any strategy to deal with it … Fiscal deficits are heading for $US1 trillion dollars and the debt ratio is already twice as high as a decade ago, so there is little room for fiscal expansion.

Of course, none of this Feldstein nonsense is remotely correct.”

11 Ingelesez: “As I explained in these blog posts – There is no financial crisis so deep that cannot be dealt with by public spending – still! (October 11, 2010) and The government has all the tools it needs, anytime, to resist recession (August 20, 2016) – a currency-issuing government can always attenuate the impacts of a financial crisis that has its origins in a non-government spending collapse.

This capacity is independent of what policy positions the same government has run prior to the crisis. Any notion that a running a deficit now (of any scale) in some way reduces the capacity to run a similar scale deficit in the future is plain wrong.

There is not even a nuance that we can bring to that proposition – a conditionality. Plain wrong is plain wrong.

12 Ingelesez: “When Feldstein is saying that “there is little room for fiscal expansion” he is just rehearsing the fake knowledge of the mainstream economists who define fiscal space in circular terms.

Sort of like this:

1. Fiscal expansion can only occur if deficits and debt ratios are low.

2. Currently deficits and debt ratios are higher than they were at some point in the past.

3. Therefore we have run out of fiscal space.

A circular, self-referencing proposition. Which begins wrongly and thus concludes wrongly.

13 Ingelesez: “If there is a new crisis, then there will be massive fiscal space which will be defined by the idle resources in the non-government sector that have become unemployed because non-government spending collapses.

That is the only way in which we can talk about ‘fiscal space’. If there are productive resources that are idle and available to be brought back into productive use, then there is fiscal space.

The fact is that there is no crisis large enough that the government through appropriate fiscal policy implementation cannot respond to.

There is no non-government spending collapse big enough that the government cannot maintain full employment through appropriate fiscal policy implementation.

A currency-issuing government can always use that capacity to buy whatever idle resources there are for sale in the currency it issues, and that includes all idle labour.

A currency-issuing government always chooses what the unemployment rate will be in their nation.

If there is mass unemployment (higher than frictional – what you would expect as people move between jobs in any week), then the government’s net spending (its deficit is too low or surplus too high).

I explain the so-called helicopter money option in this blog (also cited above) – Keep the helicopters on their pads and just spend (December 20, 2012).”

14 Ingelesez: “By way of summary (although I urge you to read that blog post if you are uncertain):

1. Introducing new spending capacity into the economy will always stimulate demand and real output and, as long as there is excess productive capacity, will not constitute an inflation threat.

2. When there is weak non-government spending, relative to total productive capacity (and unemployment) then that spending capacity has to come from government.

3. The government can always put the brakes on when the economy approaches the inflation threshold.

4. A currency-issuing governments does not have to issue debt to match any spending in excess of its tax receipts (that is, to match its deficit) with debt-issuance. That is a hangover from the fixed-exchange rate, convertible currency era that collapsed in August 1971.

5. Quantitative easing where the central bank exchanges bank reserves for a government bond – is just a financial asset swap – between the government and non-government sector. The only way it can impact positively on aggregate demand is if the lower interest rates it brings in the maturity range of the bond being bought stimulates private borrowing and spending.

6. But non-government borrowing is a function of aggregate demand itself (and expectations of where demand is heading). When elevated levels of unemployment persist and there are widespread firm failures, borrowers will be scarce, irrespective of lower interest rates.

7. Moreover, bank lending is not constrained by available reserves. QE was based on the false belief that banks would lend if they had more reserves.

Please read the following blogs – Building bank reserves will not expand credit (December 13, 2009) and Building bank reserves is not inflationary (December 13, 2009) – for further discussion.

8. Governments always spend in the same way – by issuing cheques or crediting relevant bank accounts. There is no such thing as spending by ‘printing money’ as opposed to spending ‘by raising tax receipts or issuing debt’. Irrespective of these other operations, spending occurs in the same way every day.

9. A sovereign government is never revenue constrained because it is the monopoly issuer of the currency.

10. If the government didn’t issue debt to match their deficit, then like all government spending, the Treasury would credit the reserve accounts held by the commercial bank at the central bank. The commercial bank in question would be where the target of the spending had an account. So the commercial bank’s assets rise and its liabilities also increase because a deposit would be made.

11. Taxation does the opposite – commercial bank assets fall and liabilities also fall because deposits are reduced. Further, the payee of the tax has decreased financial assets (bank deposit) and declining net worth (a liability/equity entry on their balance sheet).

12. A central bank can always credit bank accounts on behalf of the treasury department and facilitate government spending. This is the so-called ‘central bank financing’ option in textbooks (that is, ‘helicopter money’). It is a misnomer.

And the point is that all this talk of sovereign debt crises and the central bank running out of firepower is actually raising the probability of a renewed financial crisis emanating from the non-government sector, which is clearly, despite all the myths that have been told, was the source of the GFC.”




Warren Mosler, independent candidate for Governor of the USVI, is running with Ray Fonseca as his Lt. Governor.

Mosler, who resides in St. Croix, and Fonseca, who resides in St. Thomas, will be setting up the team’s campaign headquarters on both islands and plan to host formal openings and press conferences in August after the primary.





Financial Sector:

2003 – Present- relocated Valance Co, Inc. to St. Croix in the US Virgin Islands from Florida, where he currently resides and conducts his principle business activities.

1993- Present- Founder, ‘Modern Monetary Theory’ economic school of thought.

1983-1997– AVM, L.P. Founder and manager – AVM is a broker/dealer that provides advanced financial services to large institutional accounts.

1982 –1997 Founder and manager, Illinois Income Investors (III) – Developed numerous successful strategies that utilized US Government securities, mortgage backed securities, LIBOR swaps and LIBOR caps, and financial futures markets in a market neutral, 0 duration strategy.   Originated the ‘mortgage swap’ in 1986.  Mosler’s fund was a counter party in the largest futures delivery to date (over $20 billion notional) in Japan in 1996, and he also created the current $US swap futures contract.   III was rated #1 in risk adjusted returns globally by Managed Account Reports with assets over $3 billion when Mosler turned management control over to his partners at the end of 1997.  

1996-2013- Enterprise National Bank: Former Director and major shareholder.

1978-1984 – William Blair and Company, Chicago – Founded fixed income arbitrage department. Developed numerous successful trading strategies in fixed income and derivative product markets.

1976-1978 – Banker’s Trust NYC, Vice President, Sales and Trading – Instituted active forward markets in GNMA securities trading. Designed arbitrage strategies utilizing newly emerging financial forward and futures markets.

1975-1976 – Bache and Co. – Fixed Income Institutional Sales

1973-1975 – The Savings Bank of Manchester – Pioneered the use of synthetic short term investments with long term securities and forward markets.


Designed, prototyped, constructed and currently operating the QE4 Ferry between St. Croix and St. Thomas.

Former President and founder of Mosler Automotive (www.moslerauto.com) which manufactured the MT900 sports car in Riviera Beach, Florida. Sold 2013.


Academic (partial list):

Co-Founder and Distinguished Research Associate of The Center for Full Employment And Price Stability at the University of Missouri in Kansas City. CFEPS has supported economic research projects and graduate students at UMKC, the London School of Economics, the New School in NYC, Harvard University, and the University of Newcastle, Australia.

Associate Fellow, University of Newcastle, Australia

March 2014- Visiting Professor, University of Bergamo, Italy

April 2015- Visiting Professor, University of Bergamo, Italy

May 2015- Visiting Professor, University of Trento, Italy


1971- B.A. in Economics, University of Connecticut

2014- PhD, Franklin University, Honorary

PRESENTATIONS (partial list)

Testimony to Parliament finance committee, Rome, Italy- 2013

Numerous speaking engagements, Italy, 2012-2014

Alternative Proposals for a U.S. Nonconvertible Currency Regime
Presentation at the 18th Annual Hyman P. Minsky Conference, June 2009

Testimony on the FASAB Exposure Drafts relating to “Comprehensive Long-term Projections for the U.S. Government (ED 1)” and to “Accounting for Social Insurance. (ED 2)”  Feb. 25, 2009

“Current Events in Financial Markets: Economic and Specific Trading

Opportunities,’ Cambridge University Conference on ‘New’ Monetary
Policy: Implications and Relevance, March 2004.

“Workfare and Labor Market Policy,” University of Newcastle,
Australia, June 2001.

“A Review of Central Bank Options: Technical Discussion,” Singer Island, Florida, March 2001.

“A Development Plan for Palestine,” Sixth International Post Keynesian Conference, University of Tennessee: June 23-28, 2000.

“Declining Savings Rate and Growing Household Indebtedness in North America,” testimony before the Standing Committee on Finance, House of Commons, Ottawa, Canada, May 2000

“Exchange Rate Policy and Full Employment,” University of Newcastle, Australia, December, 1997.

“Full Employment and Price Stability,” Eastern Economics Association, March 1997.

“Soft Currency Economics,” Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, July 1996.

PUBLICATIONS – (Partial List)

‘Maximizing Price Stability in a Market Economy’, Journal of Policy Modeling, January 2017, co authored by Professor Damiano Bruno Silipo, Università della Calabria

‘The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy’, self published, March 2010.

“Critique of John B. Taylor’s ‘Expectations, Open Market Operations, and Changes in the Federal Funds Rate’,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, forthcoming.

“Public Sector Employment, Foreign Exchange and Trade,” Achieving Full Employment, edited by Ellen Carlson and William F. Mitchell, pp. 62-71, vol. 12, ELRR: Sydney, 2001.

“Building a Palestinian Economy,” Middle East Insight Magazine, pp. 57-59, Washington DC, June-July 2001.

“Comment on ‘In the Interests of Safety,’ by Martin Mayer,” in The Management of Global Financial Markets, edited by Jan Joost Teunissen, pp. 94-101, FONDAD: The Hague, 2000.

“Exchange Rate Policy and Full Employment,” The Path to Full Employment, Ellen Carlson and William F. Mitchell (eds.), pp. 12-22, vol. 11, ELRR: Sydney, 2000.

“A General Framework for the Analysis of Currencies and Commodities”, in Full Employment and Price Stability in a Global Economy, edited by Paul Davidson and Jan Kregel, pp. 166-177, Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc, 1999.

“Full Employment and Price Stability,” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Vol. 20, No. 2, Winter 1997-98.


Bullet Points:

Draft in progress updated 8/30/18


Government is established to provide public infrastructure for public purpose, both directly and indirectly.

     Reduce the size of the USVI Senate from 15 to 7 Senators
          Subdivide St. Thomas and St. Croix into 3 geographical districts,
          east, west, and center, with approximately equal populations in each district.
          St. John becomes a separate district that elects its own Senator.
              3 Senators for St. Thomas each representing 1 of the 3 districts
              3 Senators for St. Croix each representing 1 of the 3 districts
              1 Senator for the district of St. John
          Each district will elect its one Senator, with each voter getting one vote
                for a candidate running for Senate in his district
Secure the Right to Vote for President of the United States
          The procedure would be similar to that of US military stationed overseas
          USVI voters would be assigned a US state where they could register for
                Presidential elections and vote by absentee ballot  
          Congressional authorization is required

     Work with cruise ship companies to make St. Thomas their feature destination.
           Coordinate Port Authority requirements with overall public purpose.
           Coordinate WICO with Port Authority to serve overall public purpose.
     Expedite the restoration of St. Thomas and St. John hotels.
     Provide financial incentives to our hotels and villas for business tourism such as seminars
          and conferences where the attendees are working and generating VI source income with
          their Federal taxes credited to the USVI.  Those same incentives can also be used to
          establish sports training centers for professional teams,      
     Secure direct air service between NYC and St. Croix, which we haven’t had since 1989
     Support air service to the other Caribbean islands  
     Work with the Economic Development Authority to establish an industrial park with surplus
              power from our new generators and solar facilities (currently being purchased)
              discounted to a small premium over marginal cost to attract businesses that use large
              amounts of electric power
Public Education- All Schools K-12 Free for all Students-
    All private schools would receive a $10,000 per student scholarship grant
         Enrollment would then be by ability, not affordability
         Churches and other organizations eligible to open new schools,
               including schools for special needs students, math and science
               oriented schools, trade schools, and schools of the arts
         Increased quality of education
         With USVI public schools costing over $20,000 per student, the USVI
                will ultimately over $50 million per year
         Parental involvement increases
         Children and therefore parents become important and sought after by the schools
     Upgrade and consolidate public schools
Public Safety-
    Cameras, communications, lab access, and other technological support
    Inter island staffing, rotation, and continuing education
    Sufficient funding for staffing requirements and lab work
    Supporting the legal system with appropriate legislation
    Work with Federal Govt. to open the National Guard to anyone age 16-24
         who is not in school or working full time

     Corruption will not be tolerated
     Adequately staff and fund the Inspector General’s office   
     Provide full and immediate transparency to USVI financial matters

Public/Private Interface-
     Task the Lt. Governor with insuring all USVI Government employees
          understand that government exists only to serve public purpose
     Provide ongoing hospitality training to USVI Government employees  
     Monitor USVI Government employee interactions with the general public
Legal System-
     Procedural adjustments to facilitate processing
     Electronic filing
     Disputes between government agencies to be settled by the Legislature
           rather than the courts
     Enact legislation to ease public and private legal burdens

Public Health-
     Restructure hospital facilities
     Restructure physician requirements and contractual arrangements
     Modernize regulations regarding PA’s (physician assistants)
           Supervising Physician physical presence requirement
           Establish PA collaborative agreements with a physicians
     Promote decentralized medical services
     Upgrade emergency services
     Implement financial efficiencies-
          Enhance Medicare and other insurance collections operations
          Consolidate government employee, retiree, corporate and personal health care
      Recognize that the USVI government retains income taxes paid by those in the medical
               sector, and recognize therefore that the medical sector is profitable for the USVI
               government and should be accordingly supported and promoted
     Support private sector mental health facilities  
          ****Note that what can be called the ‘medical sector’, which includes the hospitals,
          doctors offices, medical labs and treatment centers when taken together are a
          net payer of taxes to the USVI Government.  So while the hospitals may require
          funding, the rest of the medical sector generates substantially more than that in taxes for
          the USVI Government.

Roads and Transportation Infrastructure-
   Ensure compliance and accountability needed to secure federal funding
   Formalize the ‘$2 taxi’ system, including covered pickup and drop off stations
   Establish roundabouts at appropriate intersections
   Designate truck routes
   Improve road surfaces and durability
   Address drainage issues  
   Support the Port Authority’s vision to bring small cruise ships to Christiansted  

Waste Management-
    Waste to energy power plants on St. Thomas and St. Croix
    Free disposal sites for trash
    Utilize purified waste water for agriculture

Water and Power Authority-
     Decentralization to minimize service outages and expenses
     Initiate the process of replacing or relocating our (far too dangerous) propane systems
     Investigate the solar electric steam powered systems being used in the states  
     Finance and service home and business solar systems
     Restructure existing debt at lower rates
Emergency Services-
    Plan for emergency services supplies and distribution
    Training and drills  
    Centralized information including websites and offices
    Public assistance to those in need

Licensing and Consumer Affairs-
    Make the term of a business license 5 years instead of 1 or 2 years
    Online instructions for business licenses and registrations    
    Ensure competitive prices
    Regulate non competitive businesses

    Refinance public debt at lower interest rates with bonds collateralized with tax credits
         Saves over $50 million/year in interest expense
         Allows the USVI to recover over $100 million of reserves currently held in escrow
    Work with US Congress to secure our per capita share of Federal deficit spending   
    Utilize our ‘mirror tax code’ to our advantage
    Recover federal taxes paid to Washington on USVI source income
    Work to attract corporate headquarters
    Work to attract medical clinics that retain long term patients
    Work with stateside nonprofits to relocate their large donors to the USVI

Government Employees Retirement Fund solvency restoration-
    Contribute $600 million of rum cover over bonds to the GERS
    Offer optional lump sum payments to employees
    Recognize that we keep our own income taxes and therefore the unfunded liability has been
        materially overstated and that income taxes paid from GERS benefits will be credited back
        to the GERS.

    US government regulators have redlined the USVI, which means FDIC member banks
    including JP Morgan and Wells Fargo have been directed by their regulators to not make any
    loans in the USVI.  I will work with our Delegate to Congress to make Congress aware of this
    rogue action and work to immediately eliminate this policy.    




Having support at the polling stations on election day, November 6, is critical!

So please let us know if you’re available to volunteer at any of the polling stations listed below.

We will be supplying lots of good food to keep you all going strong!

All you have to do now is provide your name, email, and phone number.

Thanks very much!!!!

Warren and Ray


Press Releases


Download File


Radio Ad 1non-stop NY flight explanation (3/27 interview on WVVI 93.5 FM)

Radio Ad 2 bringing more cruise ships explanation

Radio Ad 3collecting federal taxes from visitors explanation

Radio Ad 4proposals for the GERS explanation

Radio Ad 5GERS accountability explanation

Radio Ad 6private school scholarship explanation

Radio Ad 7funding the GERS explanation

Radio Ad 8improving public services explanation

Radio Ad 9  — A matter of conscience

Radio Ad 10 — Senator vote

Radio Ad 11 — swimming in a sea of sharks

Radio Ad 13 — I don’t lie to anyone

Chicken Shack Ad
Chicken Shack Ad 2

Feb 7 interview

Mar 27 Interview (WVVI 93.5 FM)

Apr 2 Interview

Apr 20 Interview

August 23 interview video (WVVI 93.5 FM)

August 29 interview video

August 30 interview (1620 AM)

9/04 VI Consortium interview video

9/06 WVVI interview video


Political Spot on WCVI TV23 Channel 23


To all of our supporters,

As you probably already know, I am running for Governor of the U.S. Virgin Islands this year with Ray Fonseca as my running mate.  I am running as a matter of conscience to promote my proposals for our Virgin Islands.  These proposals are outlined in detail on my website, www.mosler4governor.com and they include:

  1. Education:  My universal $10,000 scholarship proposal makes all private and public schools free of charge for all students in grades K-12.  I see the current system of private school admissions being based on money as grossly unfair and counter to our core values.   With this proposal, admission to the private schools will be based on merit and no longer based on money.This proposal also opens the door for our churches and other existing and new non-profits to open or expand their own schools, while at the same elevating the quality of education as parents select which schools they prefer for their children.  And since the $10,000 per student that private schools currently require to operate is a lot less than what our public schools cost to operate, our government can soon be saving tens of millions of dollars each year
  2. GERS (Government Employee Retirement System):  To begin to restore the solvency of the GERS, I’m proposing to contribute the $600 million secured rum cover-over bonds that previously were authorized but were never issued directly to the GERS, which will then directly get the principle and interest payments.  This immediately increases the assets of the GERS from $700 million to $1.3 billion, greatly enhancing the ability to of retirees to get their full retirement pay as promised without increasing contributions.  I will also offer optional lump sum payments to retirees that reduce the unfunded liabilities, and I will immediately cease and desist the current practice of diverting contributions to other uses.  In addition, income taxes paid on moneys received from the GERS by retirees will be credited back to the GERS, so that, again, the government will not be using GERS funds for other purposes.
  3. Restructuring U.S. Virgin Islands debt:  There are several avenues open for refinancing our public debt at lower interest rates which can save us well over $50 million per year in interest expense, and allow the U.S. Virgin Islands to recover the nearly $200 million of reserves we had to borrow that are now held in escrow to secure the bond holders.  Refinancing options include using our federal rum revenues to secure a low cost federal loan that can pay off the existing bond holders, using USVI tax credits as collateral, and, as in the case of WAPA, using payment in kind financing to bring down interest rates.
  4. U.S. Virgin Islands source income:  Federal taxes paid on U.S. Virgin Islands source income belong to the U.S. Virgin Islands as a matter of U.S. law.  That means if we have visitors who work while they are visiting the U.S. Virgin Islands, and pay federal taxes on that income earned while they were working here, those tax dollars belong to the U.S. Virgin Islands and are in fact paid to the U.S. Virgin Islands if the taxpayer fills out the prescribed IRS forms.  Currently, however, this is rarely, if ever, done, and as a consequence, hundreds of millions of our dollars sit in Washington D.C. unclaimed.  As Governor, I will work to put a system in place to track these funds so they can be promptly claimed, and also work with the U.S. government to estimate the amount of unclaimed U.S. Virgin Islands dollars they have and can remit.

This is just a partial list of the detailed proposals on my website that (unfortunately) are unique to my candidacy.  My qualifications and experience are also on my website to help you assess my ability to implement what I’ve proposed.

And let me also add that the only way I have ever done things is honestly, transparently, and with integrity, accountability and much respect.  As Governor, you will be regularly informed as to all that is going on, as it is my sincere belief that representative government works best with a fully informed electorate.

We are now in the process of organizing our volunteers and supporting their efforts throughout the U.S. Virgin Islands with printed handouts, road signs, t shirts, and bumper stickers as well as comprehensive radio advertising.  This is all a major team effort as we reach out to involve as many people as possible in our campaign.

And while I’m personally providing the funding to support our very serious effort, there is always room for more advertising on both radio and TV, and so we welcome campaign contributions in any amount, which we assure you will be used wisely and efficiently to further promote our endeavors.

Your early contribution, made payable to “Mosler for Governor” will give our race that much of an extra boost and can rightly be considered as an investment in what we all see as a better U.S. Virgin Islands both for ourselves and for the generations that follow.  Your gift of just $25 (or more if you wish, up to a maximum of $1,000) will not only finance our campaign, but also, and of critical importance, signal to the community how serious we all are about the importance of our agenda.

Therefore our goal is to have as many people as possible make a contribution, no matter how small, as a show of support for the betterment our community.  An envelope and reply card are enclosed, or you can donate online at www.mosler4governor.com.  Again, I’m asking you to make any size contribution you feel appropriate to help us all to bring a better government to the people of the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Thank you in advance for your encouragement and support.


Warren Mosler


Comments Welcome!



Click on Comments with your message




In 2014, Warren Mosler was the recipient of the Franklin University Switzerland Honorary Degree in recognition of his contributions to the field of economics and for his ability to combine entrepreneurial spirit with his being an outstanding intellectual dedicated to serving the public purpose: “a straightforward person of the highest integrity and one of the sharpest minds.” It’s now time for Warren to serve his homeland. 

Andrea Terzi
Professor of Economics
Franklin University
Lugano, Switzerland

I have known Warren Mosler for around 25 years and have built a close relationship with him and his family. Warren is one of those single-minded treasures that thinks of things ‘out of the box’ and encourages and stimulates creative thinking in others. He has been a successful player in the financial markets and has a deep technical understanding of that world. He also has one of the most incisive minds when it comes to understanding how monetary systems actually operate and what capacities various levels of government have within those systems.

While those intellectual capacities are necessary, in my view, to equip a person for a role in government, they are not sufficient. What Warren brings in addition to his technical competence is a deep compassion and generosity for the underdog in society and he has proposed novel solutions to improve their material outcomes in many countries. He is well-known around the world in policy circles for these creative policy positions. The combination of technical competence and compassion is often lacking in those that go into official government position.

Warren has also always expressed to me that he is attached to the local affairs and issues in St Croix and sees his residential status there as being important in that regard. He would make a great Governor for all citizens in the USVI.

William Mitchell
Professor of Economics
Director, Centre of Full Employment and Equity
University of Newcastle

Warren Mosler is a world-renowned expert on public finance. His widely-influential contributions, based on long practical experience in financial markets and deep understanding of the monetary system, have shaken the field of economics to its core. Warren’s work has paved the way to improving the lives of many in ways that were previously thought to be out-of-reach by the economics profession.

Warren’s ideas have influenced the work of U.S. Congress, the European Commission, and other global institutions. In the case of Argentina, they resulted in one of the largest and most successful jobs programs in the modern era. Warren has dedicated the last several decades to developing concrete proposals for using the public purse for the public good–from innovative banking reform to pro-growth tax policies to proposals for good jobs for the unemployed.
Warren possesses an uncanny clarity of thought, original problem-solving skills and, most importantly, a strong moral compass. A very successful entrepreneur, Warren has chosen not to retire comfortably, but instead to commit himself to working for the common good.

I cannot think of a more technically capable and dedicated person to hold public office and to be entrusted with the public’s finances.

Pavlina R. Tcherneva
Associate Professor and Director
Economics and Economics & Finance Programs
Bard College, NY

I’ve worked with Warren Mosler for a quarter of a century to help create an economics that actually helps us to solve real world problems. I’ve known a lot of famous economists—including a number of those who won the Nobel Prize—but I learned more about the way the real world economy works from Warren than I did from most of them. I’ve visited Warren many times and I know that his passion for the Virgin Islands is real. With his commitment to the islands and with his superior understanding of the economic challenges faced–and of the policy solutions to problems–Warren is the obvious choice to help put the economic house in order.

L. Randall Wray, Professor of Economics, Bard College, and Senior Scholar, Levy Economics Institute

Warren Mosler is one example of how personal abilities and new ideas can combine to create jobs and wealth for himself and other people. His intellectual life-concern on the role of the government in promoting public interest and welfare makes reasonable to predict that he can do even better as Governor of the territory.

Damiano Bruno SILIPO
Professor  of Economics at the University of Calabria (ITALY)

Josep Borrell (segida)



#Catalonia is a “nation”, says #Spain’s Foreign Minister @JosepborrellF

2018 ira. 11

Josep M. Ganyet‏ @ganyet

(https://twitter.com/ganyet/status/1041014130356957185La @bbc ha deixat tota la setmana el tuit fixat amb “Catalonia is a nation, says Spain’s Foreign Minister”. Impecable carta de l’Albert Om a @JosepBorrellF.pic.twitter.com/2gr67WdQG5

2018 ira. 15

Austeritatearen jainkoa hiltzea

Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità – Daniele Basciu


Uccidere il dio dell'Austerità - Daniele Basciu (pagina)

Sfatare le superstizioni della divinità Austerità

Scritto da Daniele Basciu e pubblicato nel settembre del 2013 da Edizioni Si, Uccidere il dio dell’austerità è il primo libro che spiega la Modern Money Theory utilizzando esempi della storia economica italiana.

Il libro offre gli strumenti per riflettere su cosa sia stata in passato, cosa sia oggi e cosa potrebbe essere la moneta per gli Stati e per le collettività che li esprimono, e su come potrebbe essere utilizzata in vista dell’interesse collettivo di queste società. E sul perché le cose siano andate e stiano andando in modo del tutto opposto.

Nella storia sono già esistite delle civiltà che per costruire e venerare degli dèi hanno distrutto se stesse e il proprio futuro, come accadde agli indigeni dell’isola di Pasqua che devastarono foreste e distrussero il loro futuro per erigere mute statue di pietra da adorare. È quello che sta succedendo in Europa, oggi: uomini che a loro volta distruggono il proprio futuro in nome di dèi privi di volto.

A partire dal 5 aprile 2016, per volontà dell’Autore e gentile concessione dell’Editore, abbiamo iniziato a pubblicare alcune pillole dal libro a puntate settimanali.

Puntata 1: La moneta è una creatura sociale. Ma il dio dell’austerità non vuole che si sappia
Puntata 2: La moneta metallica vincolava la capacità di spesa dei governi
Puntata 3: La moneta fiat: ciò che può uccidere il dio dell’austerità
Puntata 4: I Titoli di Stato: governare l’economia per non essere governati dall’austerità
Puntata 5: Le tasse: bisturi per l’economia o coltello in mano all’austerità
Puntata 6: Debito pubblico: lo chiamano zavorra ma è il motore per la crescita
Puntata 7: Il Quantitative Easing: quando la moneta da sola non basta


La moneta è una creatura sociale. Ma il dio dell’austerità non vuole che si sappia

La moneta è una creatura sociale. Ma il dio dell’austerità non vuole che si sappia

di Daniele Basciu

Agli economisti mainstream piace dire che in un imprecisato periodo del passato gli uomini, abituati a scambiarsi tra loro le merci con il sistema del baratto iniziarono ad un certo punto a scambiare beni con pezzi di metallo con l’obiettivo di rendere più agevole lo scambio. La moneta nascerebbe come scelta razionale di individui che operano in un contesto di scambio beni sul mercato.

Questa interpretazione non ha un fondamento storico.

Lo ha invece una chiave di lettura diversa, che spiega la natura sociale della moneta. Nell’antichità le società, fondate su clan, gestivano l’approvvigionamento delle risorse tramite un meccanismo di tipo distributivo, e tra i diversi clan venivano a crearsi dei rapporti di debito-credito derivanti dalle offese e dai torti subiti negli scontri e nelle faide. Il meccanismo di offesa-compensazione diventava un rapporto sociale di debito-credito: chi subiva un danno godeva del diritto di vendetta tramite un credito da richiedere in termini di capi di bestiame, di ore di lavoro da prestare, ecc. Nel corso del tempo, la gestione di questi rapporti di debito-credito di origine “giudiziale” tra le persone arriva ad essere amministrata dalle autorità di governo con l’utilizzo di registrazioni su tavolette di argilla (un “Excel” primitivo). Con lo stesso metodo vengono in seguito registrati i rapporti commerciali di debito-credito. Di questo esistono testimonianze archeologiche concrete, che attestano che:

  1. i concetti di debito e credito hanno una natura SOCIALE e non derivano dall’attività dell’“homo oeconomicus”. Sono dunque utilizzati ben prima dello sviluppo di un reale sistema produttivo e allocativo di mercato;
  2. la registrazione e la compensazione contabile di rapporti di debito-credito avviene senza l’uso di “soldi fisici”;
  3. lo Stato (nella forma mista di potere politico-religioso) acquisisce la prerogativa di imporre un “debito universale” sulla cittadinanza nella forma e unità di misura stabilita dallo Stato stesso.

La moneta è una creazione sociale, quindi, ed è una creazione dello Stato.

Tratto dal capitolo primo, “Da dove vengono i soldi”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)


La moneta metallica vincolava la capacità di spesa dei governi

La moneta metallica vincolava la capacità di spesa dei governi

di Daniele Basciu

e questo piace al dio dell’austerità

Lo Stato sta all’origine di quello che è definibile come “moneta”. La moneta e il sistema di tassazione che ne impone l’uso compongono un sottosistema facente parte di un più ampio complesso di relazioni socio-politiche che costituiscono il sistema di governo di un territorio e della collettività che lo occupa.

La moneta emessa e spesa dallo Stato come monopolista è la moneta verticale, definibile come “i soldi dello Stato”. I rapporti commerciali di credito-debito tra i membri della collettività rientrano nella definizione di moneta orizzontale. In questo livello orizzontale, noto anche come “circuito monetario”, le banche, le imprese e le famiglie partecipano al circuito del credito erogato dalle banche: i “soldi delle banche”. Il circuito creditizio è l’infrastruttura immateriale che permette l’esistenza del moderno capitalismo (Alain Parguez).

I due livelli moneta (verticale) e credito (orizzontale) sono raffigurabili nella “piramide monetaria”.

Nel corso della Storia gli Stati hanno emesso per lo più moneta su supporto metallico, confrontandosi con un vincolo che potenzialmente limitava la capacità di spesa dei governi: la quantità di metallo a disposizione era il “tetto” per la creazione di moneta e la spesa che lo Stato poteva “permettersi”. Gli Stati hanno fronteggiato questo vincolo nelle maniere più diverse: conio di monete con quantità di metallo ridotto a parità di valore nominale di conio, politiche di esportazione mirate all’”accaparramento” di metalli preziosi provenienti dall’estero, incarceramento/esilio di chi aveva prestato soldi allo Stato, invasione degli Stati limitrofi. Anche gli Stati moderni hanno dovuto far fronte, prima della nascita della moneta fiat, al problema del proprio finanziamento, per lo più gestito mediante emissione di obbligazioni di Stato e indebitamento verso i capitali privati, gergalmente identificati come “Big Money” e storicamente impegnati in spostamenti internazionali alla ricerca di rendimenti reali quanto più elevati possibile.

Tratto dal capitolo secondo, “Lo Stato e i ‘soldi’: moneta, crediti, debiti”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)


La moneta fiat: ciò che può uccidere il dio dell’austerità

La moneta fiat: ciò che può uccidere il dio dell’austerità

di Daniele Basciu

Quando nel 1971 il presidente americano Nixon sospese la convertibilità del dollaro in oro, eliminando contestualmente anche il legame di cambio fisso tra le valute che aderivano agli accordi di Bretton Woods, la moneta creata dal nulla dallo Stato, detta per questo motivo fiat (dal latino: creata dal nulla), diventa

credito d’imposta su tassazione futura

Significa che l’unico impegno che assume lo Stato, nell’emetterla, è di accettarla in pagamento delle tasse che imporrà nel futuro.

La valuta spesa dallo Stato, da quel momento, è scambiata con le altre valute emesse dagli altri Stati in base al valore determinato dall’equilibrio tra domanda e offerta.

Gli unici limiti tecnici che si possono avere nell’emissione della moneta fiat sono quelli che uno Stato si può auto-imporre, limitando la propria sovranità monetaria.

Ad esempio, agganciando la propria valuta a quello di un altro Stato, come fece l’Argentina negli anni ’90 prima del default del 2001.

Oppure uno Stato può auto-limitarsi, come fecero i paesi aderenti allo SME quando s’impegnarono a contenere le oscillazioni tra i cambi delle valute all’interno di una banda definita.

Quando uno Stato ha la piena sovranità, non ha limiti di spesa dovuti alla mancanza di moneta. Il solo limite esistente è quello delle risorse reali rese disponibili dai privati e dalle aziende allo Stato in cambio dei soldi dello Stato.

La piena sovranità monetaria, il monopolio sull’emissione della propria valuta fiat, non convertibile e guidata dalle tasse, è lo strumento con cui uno Stato può sottrarsi ai condizionamenti dei mercati, ai condizionamenti del “big money”.

Tratto dal capitolo terzo. “Il 1971 e la nuova era”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)


I Titoli di Stato: governare l’economia per non essere governati dall’austerità

I Titoli di Stato: governare l'economia per non essere governati dall'austerità

di Daniele Basciu

In una situazione di piena sovranità monetaria, lo Stato spende attraverso un sistema costituito da Governo e Banca Centrale.

La Banca Centrale opera come ambiente di compensazione delle transazioni che avvengono tra banche commerciali, che sono obbligate ad avere presso la BC un conto cosiddetto di riserva.

Quando lo Stato spende, lo fa con degli ordini di accredito che incrementano il saldo di riserva della banca presso cui detiene il conto corrente il destinatario dell’accredito (destinatario che a sua volta gode di un incremento del proprio saldo di conto corrente presso la banca); il risultato finale della spesa dello Stato è che aumentano in aggregato le riserve delle banche presso la BC.

Nel caso in cui le banche dispongano di riserve in eccesso rispetto a quanto sono obbligate a detenerne presso la BC, cercheranno di collocarle rendendole disponibili sul mercato interbancario ad un interesse superiore a quello di remunerazione del conto di riserva detenuto presso la Banca Centrale. Se il rendimento delle riserve presso la BC è dello 0,5%, saranno disposte a cederle ad un’altra banca per tassi maggiori dello 0,5%.

Pertanto, poiché la spesa dello Stato determina un aumento delle riserve e quindi una immissione nel mercato delle stesse, questo eccesso imprime una spinta verso il basso dei tassi d’interesse interbancari, perché aumenta l’offerta di riserve nel mercato interbancario.

Uno Stato con la piena sovranità monetaria è sempre in grado di determinare la soglia sotto la quale non può scendere il tasso interbancario. Lo fa predisponendo un’opzione alternativa per le banche che hanno eccesso di riserve, offrendo loro di collocare le riserve in Titoli di Stato di cui lui definisce il rendimento.

Pertanto, se lo Stato offre alle banche la possibilità di collocare l’eccesso di riserve in un conto chiamato “Titoli di Stato“ ad un tasso dello 0,6%, nessuna banca sarà disposta a rendere disponibili e offrire sul mercato interbancario le proprie riserve-extra in cambio di un rendimento inferiore allo 0,6%, proprio perché per valori inferiori conviene l’acquisto di Titoli di Stato.

Lo Stato, emettendo e immettendo sul mercato Titoli di Stato, non finanzia la spesa pubblica ma drena l’eccesso di riserve del mercato interbancario. Non chiede soldi in prestito (non ne ha bisogno) per pagare la spesa pubblica, ma offre una possibile allocazione del risparmio finanziario. Infine, in questo sistema è lo Stato a decidere il tasso di interesse dei Titoli di Stato.

Tratto dal capitolo terzo, “Il 1971 e la nuova era”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì).


Le tasse: bisturi per l’economia o coltello in mano all’austerità

Le tasse: bisturi per l'economia o coltello in mano all'austerità

di Daniele Basciu

Le tasse, in uno Stato con piena sovranità monetaria, non hanno la funzione di finanziare la spesa pubblica. Infatti lo Stato prima effettua la spesa pubblica, e solo in un momento successivo raccoglie le tasse. Non ha assolutamente bisogno dei soldi dei cittadini per poter spendere: la spesa è effettuata dallo Stato con istruzioni di ordini d’accredito denominati nella propria valuta in favore dei conti corrente dei destinatari.

La tassazione ha la funzione di imporre l’uso della valuta dello Stato, che altrimenti risulterebbe priva di valore intrinseco, generandone la domanda da parte del settore privato. Inoltre la tassazione è lo strumento con cui lo Stato può incentivare o disincentivare determinate attività, produzioni, oppure comportamenti. La tassazione è anche lo strumento con cui lo Stato può intervenire sull’inflazione, riducendo la capacità aggregata di spesa del settore privato.

Quando il volume della spesa dello Stato è maggiore del volume della tassazione successivamente riscossa, il risultato costituisce il deficit dello Stato ed il risparmio finanziario dei privati.

I deficit di uno Stato, sommati nel tempo, costituiscono il debito pubblico, che nella società ha due corrispettivi: la ricchezza reale rappresentata dai beni e servizi che lo Stato ha acquistato, e la ricchezza finanziaria netta che resta registrata nei conti dei beneficiari della spesa. Questa ricchezza, per lo Stato, è una registrazione contabile nel sistema Stato-BC. Il debito pubblico, pertanto, rappresenta la denominazione nella valuta dello Stato delle spese e degli investimenti che lo Stato ha fatto per sé stesso nel corso del tempo, ovvero la contabilità del valore nominale del proprio slancio verso il futuro espresso nella valuta di cui è monopolista.

Tratto dal capitolo terzo, “Il 1971 e la nuova era”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)


Debito pubblico: lo chiamano zavorra ma è il motore per la crescita

Debito pubblico: la chiamano zavorra ma è il motore per la crescita

di Daniele Basciu

Ci sono due differenze tra i soldi spesi dallo Stato e quelli creati come credito dal sistema bancario: la prima differenza riguarda le finalità, la seconda la natura dei soldi spesi.

Lo Stato spende i soldi avendo come obiettivo il bene pubblico (anche se è vero che non sempre è così), per realizzare quella dotazione di ricchezza reale che la collettività del presente lascia in eredità alla generazione successiva (acquedotti, dighe, ospedali, scuole, ferrovie, territorio non inquinato, ricerca, ecc..). L’interesse pubblico è un concetto slegato dal profitto: un servizio sanitario di alto livello erogato nei piccoli centri non può generare un profitto.

Dall’altro lato, l’erogazione del credito all’attività imprenditoriale privata è funzionale a generare profitto per attività d’impresa, e non è finalizzata al bene della collettività.

L’erogazione del credito coincide al tempo stesso con attività di spesa dei privati e con un indebitamento di soggetti privati nei confronti del sistema bancario (anch’esso collocato nel settore privato); il risultato può essere un aumento della domanda aggregata e ad un aumento dell’occupazione, ma tutto questo, per quanto positivo, non va necessariamente a vantaggio dell’interesse pubblico.

Inoltre, l’aumento dell’indebitamento aggregato da parte di famiglie e imprese (un “risparmio finanziario negativo”) non può durare lungo, e in genere si conclude con una fase di brusca e violenta riduzione del tasso d’indebitamente e del volume del debito, minore domanda aggregata, minor produzione e quindi meno posti di lavoro necessari.

In questo contesto, l’unico soggetto che può spendere in deficit per compensare la domanda aggregata che viene meno e i relativi livelli occupazionali è lo Stato.

La sintesi è che il debito, sia esso pubblico o privato, è necessario al funzionamento del sistema economico in cui viviamo. Ma, mentre l’accumulo del debito da parte dei privati non può durare a lungo ed è caratterizzato da andamento ciclico, l’accumulo del debito per uno Stato (denominato nella moneta fiat di cui è monopolista) non è un problema, perché si tratta di una figura contabile: sono soldi (passività finanziarie) che lo Stato non deve restituire a nessuno, non avendoli presi in prestito da nessuno.

Tratto dal capitolo quarto, “Qualche cosa permessa agli Stati con sovranità monetaria”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)


Il Quantitative Easing: quando la moneta da sola non basta

Il Quantitative Easing: quando la moneta da sola non basta

di Daniele Basciu

Abbiamo svariati esempi di uso della sovranità monetaria non orientati al benessere della collettività: il QE (Quantitative Easing) è il prototipo perfetto. Agli occhi di molti rappresenta la massima espressione di ciò che possono fare gli Stati con sovranità monetaria, nella realtà è uno strumento del tutto inadeguato a ridurre la disoccupazione. I detrattori della MMT affermano che il QE è la prova provata che “stampare moneta come dice la MMT non funziona”, dimostrando così di non conoscere la MMT.

Il QE è uno strumento inadeguato a ridurre la disoccupazione per due motivi, legati alla filosofia del QE ed al meccanismo di creazione del credito da parte delle banche.

L’obiettivo del QE non è il finanziamento diretto di un intervento di spesa dello Stato, ma lo stimolo del credito nel settore privato, credito che dovrebbe alimentare la spesa di imprese e famiglie.

Nella realtà il QE consiste nell’acquisto, da parte della Banca Centrale, di Titoli di Stato già emessi dal Tesoro; in cambio “cambia i numeri” dei conti di riserva che le banche hanno presso la Banca Centrale. Operativamente, abbiamo lo spostamento di numeri da un conto deposito (il titolo di Stato) a un conto riserva (presso la Banca Centrale). Non c’è nessuna “stampa di soldi” o “iniezione di liquidità” connessa ad un intervento nell’economia reale. Anzi, l’operazione rimuove dal sistema economico il reddito da interesse che il detentore dei titoli percepisce, assorbito dalla BC insieme al titolo.

Il secondo punto ruota intorno alle aspettative sul QE come stimolo all’economia reale, fondate sull’errato convincimento che, nell’erogazione del credito, le banche commerciali siano vincolate al meccanismo del “moltiplicatore monetario”. Secondo tale scorretto presupposto, le banche creerebbero e concederebbero credito come multiplo delle riserve bancarie detenute presso la Banca Centrale; pertanto, a seguito di un incremento (conseguente al QE) dell’entità di queste riserve, le banche andrebbero proporzionalmente a creare più credito. Ma questo non corrisponde alla realtà. Nella realtà, non esiste una catena di trasmissione diretta che parte dall’espansione delle riserve bancarie e porta all’incremento dei volumi di credito erogato al settore privato. Le banche non prestano riserve alla clientela, e non erogano più prestiti come conseguenza dell’incremento delle riserve.

Pertanto, come afferma Warren Mosler, il QE

Non ripristina la domanda aggregata, ma semplicemente riposiziona asset di natura finanziaria. Opera sui prezzi (tassi di interesse), non sulle quantità.

Tratto dal capitolo quinto, “La moneta da sola non basta”, di Uccidere il dio dell’Austerità (Edizioni Sì)