'Climate Change' and the coming 'Climate Lockdown'

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
We are in a new economic reality, and have been for decades; it's just the Right thinks that it can have the pre-fiat dollar times back and operates it's economic policy as such most of the time.
You keep making statements like this, asserting things are 'different.'

Okay, so you say we're in a 'new economic reality.'

Different how?

You list off things like the petrodollar, 11 carrier battle groups, and nukes, but you fail to say what exactly that makes different.

So, please explain how these things overturn the laws of supply and demand, of diminishing returns, how it changes how it works.

Exactly how. Not just sweeping, general statements. You might as well say 'Jet-liner, microwave oven, internet, people don't need food to live anymore.' You have to explain the connection if you want to communicate meaningfully.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
You keep making statements like this, asserting things are 'different.'

Okay, so you say we're in a 'new economic reality.'

Different how?

You list off things like the petrodollar, 11 carrier battle groups, and nukes, but you fail to say what exactly that makes different.

So, please explain how these things overturn the laws of supply and demand, of diminishing returns, how it changes how it works.

Exactly how. Not just sweeping, general statements. You might as well say 'Jet-liner, microwave oven, internet, people don't need food to live anymore.' You have to explain the connection if you want to communicate meaningfully.
The entire Right Wing economic policy and model set is based on pre-fiat-dollar ideas of the rules of supply and demand in monetary policy.

Like the idea the national debt matters, because so much of the Right still operates as though household finance rules apply at the nation-state level, when they clearly don't, thanks to things like the ability to issue currency and leverage debt at a international level. Sovereign debt does not operate like personal debt, and that is something the right never seems to want to admit.

As well, the fact that US monetary policy is partly a international tributary system, ala SWIFT access, makes US monetary policy an tool of international soft-power.

Traditional economics does not count in being a hegemon and the...non-economic means the US has to ensure our tributary system is not abused, like sanctions and seizing assets from foreign enemies.

As well, traditional economics doesn't have two small doors in Panama and Egypt that much of it flows through, and just look at the knock-on effects from the Evergiven incident closing the Suez for a relatively short length of time.

In general, the Right needs to stop acting like household finance rules and norms apply at the national and international levels.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
The entire Right Wing economic policy and model set is based on pre-fiat-dollar ideas of the rules of supply and demand in monetary policy.
Here you again, broad sweeping statement. You don't explain what you think right wing economic policy is, much less why you think it's wrong, and what would be correct instead.
Like the idea the national debt matters, because so much of the Right still operates as though household finance rules apply at the nation-state level, when they clearly don't, thanks to things like the ability to issue currency and leverage debt at a international level. Sovereign debt does not operate like personal debt, and that is something the right never seems to want to admit.

Again, big sweeping statements. I have yet to meet a right wing economist who thinks national debt works like household debt, and if you're referring to more general right-wingers, yes, we think holding large amounts of debt is bad policy in general, to be avoided outside of emergencies and purchasing appreciating assets.

As well, the fact that US monetary policy is partly a international tributary system, ala SWIFT access, makes US monetary policy an tool of international soft-power.
You are again talking about large concepts and things, but not explaining a single thing about what such means.

Traditional economics does not count in being a hegemon and the...non-economic means the US has to ensure our tributary system is not abused, like sanctions and seizing assets from foreign enemies.

As well, traditional economics doesn't have two small doors in Panama and Egypt that much of it flows through, and just look at the knock-on effects from the Evergiven incident closing the Suez for a relatively short length of time.

In general, the Right needs to stop acting like household finance rules and norms apply at the national and international levels.
You have clarified and specified pretty much nothing. The only thing you've added here is referencing household finances as a thing that exists.

You're making more broad sweeping statements. It isn't clear to me you even know how household finances work, you certainly have given no clear understanding of or model for national or international finances, you definitely haven't explained how they're different or why.

You're just making grand statements with absolutely no clear indication what they're supposed to mean.

What are you trying to accomplish to by this?
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
The entire Right Wing economic policy and model set is based on pre-fiat-dollar ideas of the rules of supply and demand in monetary policy.

Like the idea the national debt matters, because so much of the Right still operates as though household finance rules apply at the nation-state level, when they clearly don't, thanks to things like the ability to issue currency and leverage debt at a international level. Sovereign debt does not operate like personal debt, and that is something the right never seems to want to admit.
Yes, it's more complicated than household finance rules. Some things can be handwaved away, sometimes for a time, sometimes for good, sometimes it depends, but it's also possible to fuck it up in ways impossible with household rules.
As well, the fact that US monetary policy is partly a international tributary system, ala SWIFT access, makes US monetary policy an tool of international soft-power.
Only if handled correctly. If socialists would get to play with it too much, it would be an international disaster, not international soft power.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Here you again, broad sweeping statement. You don't explain what you think right wing economic policy is, much less why you think it's wrong, and what would be correct instead.
It seems to mostly consist of quote Reagan or Ayn Rand, bleeting about how returning 'fiscal conservatism' will surely help win the next election cycle, and sucking off the corpo's that don't openly bow to woke shit, or are part of the MIC.
Again, big sweeping statements. I have yet to meet a right wing economist who thinks national debt works like household debt, and if you're referring to more general right-wingers, yes, we think holding large amounts of debt is bad policy in general, to be avoided outside of emergencies and purchasing appreciating assets.
See, right here, this bit shows exactly what I am talking about; ignorant Right Wings who have been sold lies for decades about how modern monetary policy works, and think that national debt operates like personal debt, and enact policies towards that.
You are again talking about large concepts and things, but not explaining a single thing about what such means.
Yes, I am talking about the high level concepts and their broad reach, because that is where the disconnect between perception and reality is with a lot of the GOP base and modern monetary policy.
You have clarified and specified pretty much nothing. The only thing you've added here is referencing household finances as a thing that exists.
I have clarified part of what is the issue, but the reality is it is the upper level perceptual and conceptual arena where the GOP's base has suffered a disconnect from modern monetary reality.
You're making more broad sweeping statements. It isn't clear to me you even know how household finances work, you certainly have given no clear understanding of or model for national or international finances, you definitely haven't explained how they're different or why.
I have tried, you didn't like my explanation, because you still don't get that high level, broad strokes conceptual arena is where the disconnect is, and that the GOP base has been living in a monetary illusion for decades because of internal GOP propaganda.
You're just making grand statements with absolutely no clear indication what they're supposed to mean.

What are you trying to accomplish to by this?
Oh, I know what I mean to say and am saying as I wish; you just don't seem to understand that the disconnect between the GOP base and monetary policy is a broad and generalized failing of the GOP's leadership and media organs.

And if this isn't 'detailed' enough for your like, tough shit; the GOP base failing to understand modern monetary reality is the result of trying to hold onto the same stupid desire to make it the America of the 1950's again.

And really, the GOP as a whole barely has a coherent monetary policy besides 'cut taxes and fund the military' most of the time, largely because the GOP upper echelon's understand that their base has been duped into believing in an economic and monetary reality that no longer exists.

US money is worth however much the Federal Reserve wants it to be worth via interest rates, the dollar supply will expand or contract at the demand of the Fed Reserve, and the money printers will go brrr printing fiat-dollars regardless of what traditional economists say. That's the reality the GOP base either denies or tries to ignore in it's monetary policies.
Yes, it's more complicated than household finance rules. Some things can be handwaved away, sometimes for a time, sometimes for good, sometimes it depends, but it's also possible to fuck it up in ways impossible with household rules.
Oh, this is all true, there are ways to fuck up international monetary policy that aren't really available for the private individual at home.

Just look at the measures Russia has taken to try to save the ruble.
Only if handled correctly. If socialists would get to play with it too much, it would be an international disaster, not international soft power.
Yes, it is absolutely possible to blow the soft-power edge that SWIFT imparts, particularly if people have illusions about the nature of their nation's monetary system/situation.

Luckily, Russia's stupidity and actions over the last year have made it much easier to point to what happens when you piss away your soft-power advatnages, and what not to do with your monetary policy for 'rescue' measures.
 

Yinko

Well-known member
and think that national debt operates like personal debt, and enact policies towards that.
You have yet to talk about how you think national debt actually works, merely stating how it does not.

US money is worth however much the Federal Reserve wants it to be worth via interest rates
You seem to be under the impression that the fiat system is viable and stable. We can see that the statement "the Fed determines how much the dollar is worth and prints as much as they want" is either untrue or only part of the picture because the central government does not have infinite money, we do not live in a utopia of endless public spending for social goods, there is an actual fiscal budget instead of an endless money fountain.

Interest rates do not determine the value of a currency, they discourage lending which slows the turn-over of currency, creating short-term drop in prices because people perceive that there is a smaller money supply than there actually is. This can only go so far, especially since governments hate deflation because it makes the value of their national debt greater. Which would make no sense if they could do whatever they wanted. Without government manipulation, the natural trend for a currency under the effects of automation is deflationary, as goods and services get cheaper due to increased efficiencies.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
You have yet to talk about how you think national debt actually works, merely stating how it does not.
It does not work like personal debt, yes; it still exist at the national level, but then becomes almost a boone, because you can sell portions of your national debt to foreign powers on the intenrational market, and just like banks trade debts with each other all the time, so do nations states.

The only reason we have a Federal income tax is to pay the interest on the national debt, not pay it down directly; no national debt means no debt to sell on the international market as part of foreign policy actions.
You seem to be under the impression that the fiat system is viable and stable.
No, I'm just not under the illusion the pre-fiat-dollar economics is the same as modern economics.
We can see that the statement "the Fed determines how much the dollar is worth and prints as much as they want" is either untrue or only part of the picture because the central government does not have infinite money, we do not live in a utopia of endless public spending for social goods, there is an actual fiscal budget instead of an endless money fountain.
You conflate the idea we have effectively infinite money with the idea that those in charge of said would be trying to create a utopia if they had access to effectively infinite money.

We have infinite money to make sure the people who matter most to keeping the Fed gov operational will always be paid, no matter the economic conditions.

Also, it's why there is a large shift to private scripts, or tokens, or other corporate goodies that are part incentive to shop at their store, part is their own semi-fiat currency. They know the game, and want in on it; it's also why crypto NFTs was liked by some, because it was a way for a private individual to create their own fiat currency as well.
Interest rates do not determine the value of a currency, they discourage lending which slows the turn-over of currency, creating short-term drop in prices because people perceive that there is a smaller money supply than there actually is. This can only go so far, especially since governments hate deflation because it makes the value of their national debt greater. Which would make no sense if they could do whatever they wanted.
You still don't see that on the international level, sovereign debt is an asset for the US, if managed right.

As well, the MIC's logistical trial is tied to SWIFT and using our system; which is another bit of leverage that most economics don't really factor in to their calculations.
Without government manipulation, the natural trend for a currency under the effects of automation is deflationary, as goods and services get cheaper due to increased efficiencies.
The govs have always and will always manipulate their currency; it's not some new thing.

The US just has the position to be able to make our fiat-currency the dominating currency globally, and thus force others to play our game. Selling chunks of our sovereign debt has been part of that.

Though this is not a part of international monetary policy the GOP leadership ever talks to their base about, though the corpo head's who are major donors know the score.

They just don't talk tot he GOP base about this because most of their base are still stuck in the pre-fiat currency economic mindset, and don't want to be told they have been living in an economic illusion since the gold standard was dropped.
 

Bassoe

Well-known member
So, please explain how these things overturn the laws of supply and demand, of diminishing returns, how it changes how it works.
Automation and global labor pools. This is basic union politics, if the bosses have unlimited mechanical or foreign scabs, wages are going to go down.
Bernie Sanders said:
Open borders? That's a Koch brothers proposal.
 

mrttao

Well-known member
You keep making statements like this, asserting things are 'different.'

Okay, so you say we're in a 'new economic reality.'

Different how?

You list off things like the petrodollar, 11 carrier battle groups, and nukes, but you fail to say what exactly that makes different.

So, please explain how these things overturn the laws of supply and demand, of diminishing returns, how it changes how it works.

Exactly how. Not just sweeping, general statements. You might as well say 'Jet-liner, microwave oven, internet, people don't need food to live anymore.' You have to explain the connection if you want to communicate meaningfully.
For the most part he is just spouting platitudes without explaining how or why.
He is also conflating money with value... he asserts that modern weaponry make peasant revolts impossible. Therefore the govt can just print itself unlimited wealth... but... just because people can't revolt doesn't mean there is actual infinite amount of actual real value in the economy for them to steal. even if the govt steals 100% of it, they can still run out. something he is missing out.

However, he does have a point with petrodollars.
When a country prints a bunch of money, they rob their citizens.
Thanks to petrodolars, every country in the world backs their currency with USD.
So when the USA prints a bunch of money they rob everyone in the entire world.
Thanks to USA military aggression, other countries are forced to keep using the petrodollars. with everyone who tries to refuse getting murdered or invaded or both

There are still limited amount of resources. But with more victims to rob, they can keep it going further
 

Bassoe

Well-known member
(At the risk of being cringe…)


52dodp.jpg
Zyobot had it right, the prequels were a prophetic masterpiece however unintentionally. A wannabe dictator justifying an increasingly-totalitarian security state with fear of abstract threats and technocratic oligarchs trying to directly link wealth and military prowess by making military force a matter purely of "which side can afford to manufacture the most robotic killdrones".
Say what you will about the Prequels, but they're looking more and more prescient every day. In fact, I half expect future generations to treat them as an inadvertent warning of what was to come, rather than the mixed bag most SW fans think of them as nowadays.
 

Blasterbot

Well-known member
Zyobot had it right, the prequels were a prophetic masterpiece however unintentionally. A wannabe dictator justifying an increasingly-totalitarian security state with fear of abstract threats and technocratic oligarchs trying to directly link wealth and military prowess by making military force a matter purely of "which side can afford to manufacture the most robotic killdrones".


Alex jones being correct on the prequels. it resembles reality more than I want it to.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
It seems to mostly consist of quote Reagan or Ayn Rand, bleeting about how returning 'fiscal conservatism' will surely help win the next election cycle, and sucking off the corpo's that don't openly bow to woke shit, or are part of the MIC.

See, right here, this bit shows exactly what I am talking about; ignorant Right Wings who have been sold lies for decades about how modern monetary policy works, and think that national debt operates like personal debt, and enact policies towards that.

Yes, I am talking about the high level concepts and their broad reach, because that is where the disconnect between perception and reality is with a lot of the GOP base and modern monetary policy.
So what is 'modern monetary policy' then? How does it work? Why?
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
So what is 'modern monetary policy' then? How does it work? Why?
It's is using fiat-currency and debt trading to manipulate national-level financial policy and enable foreign policy soft-power by utilizing said debt trading, while using tax revenue to just pay down the interest on the national debt, so that it does not enter a runaway debt or inflation spiral.

It also utilizes sanctions and asset seizure from hostile powers as means of alternate revenue generation, along with layers of tariffs and tax breaks to incentivize different actions by domestic and international monetary players (banks, venture capitalists, credit bureaus).

As well, we tied the petro-dollar to oil markets in general, and SWIFT enables a massive amount of control over who can use dollars and where internationally, so the threat of being cut out of SWIFT acts both as a foreign policy soft-power measure and a oil supply lever against certain nations, but also a threat against non-American banking systems that want to play fast and loose with sanctions.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
It's is using fiat-currency and debt trading to manipulate national-level financial policy and enable foreign policy soft-power by utilizing said debt trading, while using tax revenue to just pay down the interest on the national debt, so that it does not enter a runaway debt or inflation spiral.

It also utilizes sanctions and asset seizure from hostile powers as means of alternate revenue generation, along with layers of tariffs and tax breaks to incentivize different actions by domestic and international monetary players (banks, venture capitalists, credit bureaus).

As well, we tied the petro-dollar to oil markets in general, and SWIFT enables a massive amount of control over who can use dollars and where internationally, so the threat of being cut out of SWIFT acts both as a foreign policy soft-power measure and a oil supply lever against certain nations, but also a threat against non-American banking systems that want to play fast and loose with sanctions.
Okay, I'll give you that you've finally given some details here, rather than just making sweeping general statements.

You still haven't explained why this is supposed to work.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
Okay, I'll give you that you've finally given some details here, rather than just making sweeping general statements.

You still haven't explained why this is supposed to work.
It's not about 'why' it is 'supposed' to work, it's just the reality that it does work that way now, and this is the monetary system we've been in since the dropping of the gold standard.

The only reason people in the GOP think otherwise is because no one will win a GOP primary if they admit this in public and tell the GOP base they've been living, and the GOP has been grifting them by pretending to support, a monetary illusion for a few decades.
 

Scottty

Well-known member
Founder
A couple of points here:
Concerning the petrodollar - internationally that's the system simply because the oil-producing countries all follow it, and the unstated elephant in the room is that the USA will go to war to maintain it. Which will continue to work until suddenly one day it doesn't.
The Saudis are apparently now going to also accept payment in Chinese Yuan. They're not willing to lose one of their best customers just because the USA suddenly doesn't want certain countries to be trading in USD.

Regarding the money-printer: do you think it's only the government that can conjure funds out of thin air? Actually, for a long time the banks have been doing this too. Remember, they are allowed to lend out more money than they actually have in their vaults, and still pretend that they have all that money. And it's not even paper scrip anymore, but nothing more than 1's and 0's in a computer system. Which are theoretically IOU's for government-issued currency, but in practice? That's about as real as a pile of paper currency being an IOU for some gold.
 

Morphic Tide

Well-known member
Remember, they are allowed to lend out more money than they actually have in their vaults, and still pretend that they have all that money.
No, they are required to hold onto very specific classes of liquid assets up to a certain fraction of the deposits made, almost all need to hold onto some amount of hard cash for withdraws, and "truly" negative accounts are technically illegal. The regulations are designed to make it fully illegal for banks to increase the money supply. What fractional reserve banking does is increase liquidity by refusing to allow money people put into savings accounts to actually remain in them, creating the incredible spectacle of debt-based economics we live in today.

Legally speaking, every dollar spent should track back to bills or coinage authorized by the Federal Reserve. Practically speaking, I don't believe for a second anyone removes numbers in the server when hard cash is destroyed and I imagine auditing small-denomination cash deposits for "desynchs" between cash and data loaned out is a nightmare rarely tackled.

Edit: The bit about "ghost" data-dollars that outlived their cash equivalent is very important because the Federal Reserve prints a steady stream of paper bills to replace those expected to be lost to periodic wear and accidents. So if the data isn't taken out of the server at a similar rate and the bank adds numbers for the new dollars, the system is resulting in a higher money supply than intended by fiscal policy, the very thing that the very long list of fractional reserve legislation is supposed to prevent.

Edit 2: A rather clear example of the money supply vs. liquidity matter is mortgages. The entire point of a mortgage is to take out a loan to utilize the nominal value of your house for economically-useful work instead of said value being "sunk" until the building is sold, thus providing liquidity for the single largest and least-fungible asset a "normal family" is likely to have. But this is not printing money with extra steps, the house was almost definitely payed for with legitimate cash and the bank's supposed to be loaning out the same. All it does is keep the money moving, and the same goes for properly-enforced fractional reserve banking.
 
Last edited:

Simonbob

Well-known member
That's the theory.

Tim Pool once talked about a ecconomic issue his company had, where money vanished between banks, apparently by accident, from what he said.

After a consderable argument, the manager of the help section of his bank just changed his bank account up to reflect the amount it should have. Just changed the text file. Created money from nothing.


Like all fiat-currency systems, it's riddled with problems, and it'll continue to get worse. Until nobody uses it. (Not that gold backed is perfect, but, still)
 

bintananth

behind a desk
That's the theory.

Tim Pool once talked about a ecconomic issue his company had, where money vanished between banks, apparently by accident, from what he said.

After a consderable argument, the manager of the help section of his bank just changed his bank account up to reflect the amount it should have. Just changed the text file. Created money from nothing.

Like all fiat-currency systems, it's riddled with problems, and it'll continue to get worse. Until nobody uses it. (Not that gold backed is perfect, but, still)
The manager of the help section most definitely did not create money out of nothing. It just looks like the bank did to people who don't understand basic accounting.

Due to the nature of double entry bookeeping assets and liabilities always match.

By adjusting Tim Pool's account to have the correct value the bank increased a liability without increasing the bank's assets. Some other liability - in this case "owner equity" - was invisibly reduced by an equal amount.

Owner/shareholder equity is on the liabilites side because it represents the on-paper amount the owners would get after everybody else gets paid. When that number goes negative a business is technically insolvent.
 
Last edited:

Blasterbot

Well-known member
No, they are required to hold onto very specific classes of liquid assets up to a certain fraction of the deposits made, almost all need to hold onto some amount of hard cash for withdraws, and "truly" negative accounts are technically illegal. The regulations are designed to make it fully illegal for banks to increase the money supply. What fractional reserve banking does is increase liquidity by refusing to allow money people put into savings accounts to actually remain in them, creating the incredible spectacle of debt-based economics we live in today.

Legally speaking, every dollar spent should track back to bills or coinage authorized by the Federal Reserve. Practically speaking, I don't believe for a second anyone removes numbers in the server when hard cash is destroyed and I imagine auditing small-denomination cash deposits for "desynchs" between cash and data loaned out is a nightmare rarely tackled.

Edit: The bit about "ghost" data-dollars that outlived their cash equivalent is very important because the Federal Reserve prints a steady stream of paper bills to replace those expected to be lost to periodic wear and accidents. So if the data isn't taken out of the server at a similar rate and the bank adds numbers for the new dollars, the system is resulting in a higher money supply than intended by fiscal policy, the very thing that the very long list of fractional reserve legislation is supposed to prevent.

Edit 2: A rather clear example of the money supply vs. liquidity matter is mortgages. The entire point of a mortgage is to take out a loan to utilize the nominal value of your house for economically-useful work instead of said value being "sunk" until the building is sold, thus providing liquidity for the single largest and least-fungible asset a "normal family" is likely to have. But this is not printing money with extra steps, the house was almost definitely payed for with legitimate cash and the bank's supposed to be loaning out the same. All it does is keep the money moving, and the same goes for properly-enforced fractional reserve banking.
I'm pretty sure that rule got changed during the covid times. kinda like how they changed the rules regarding savings rules so they count as part of the money supply without telling anyone at the same time as they printed loads of money so they could muddy the waters on just how much they printed.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top