Me: If you don’t perceive at the level of paradigm you can theorize for ever and not see either the singular concept to base and align all policy and regulation on, or the new pattern that they all fit into. There’s nothing wrong with theorizing of course, but it’s such a much more simple rational process….after you perceive the paradigm.
Paradigm perception is the systemic equivalent of awareness….of awareness, i.e. consciousness itself. This is not new age BS it’s simply thorough going integrative thinking. Again, once you know the new paradigm you see its aligned policies, regulations and structural necessities so much more clearly and definitively, and then all you need to do is gen up the mass movement necessary to herd the entire political apparatus toward its sanity and beneficial effects.
I agree with theorists and reformers like Michael Hudson, Steve Keen and MMT. Now let’s recognize the paradigm that unifies their thinking and get it implemented….with post haste.
DT: Well yes, Craig; so what do you make of what I keep trying to say? What I see deficient in your arguments is any mention of the form of payback for the giving. It certainly shouldn’t be tit for tat, as the monetarists now demand.
Me: The pay back is the rebating of every cent of the retail merchant’s discount/gift to the consumer by a monetary authority specifically mandated to do so, and so that they are made whole on their overheads and margins of profit. The new paradigm is Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting. This is not the indirect, abstract, flawed and elitist financial nonsense of monetarism. It is the new paradigm of Direct and Reciprocal Monetary Gifting. Any other questions? I’ll be happy to address them.
Steve Keen correctly identifies the fact that modern economies are demand constrained and in disequilibrium. But he didn’t see that we can create what I refer to as “the higher disequilibrium” by cogniting on the fact that retail sale is the terminal expression point for inflation and utilize the digital nature of the pricing and money systems and implement a discount/rebate policy that breaks up Finance’s virtual monopoly on credit creation and is of a high enough percentage that no enterprise can game it or resist opting into it.
Michael Hudson correctly rails against Finance as parasitical. The fact that one agrees to buy a home from a home building corporation for $200k…and then POST that retail sale you have to go to a bank and add on a note that increases your costs by a factor of 3 or 4….exposes finance as an exterior parasite that has been problematic for at least the last 5000 years as David Graeber has written about. It is the sheerest of folly that private finance with its monopoly paradigm of Debt ONLY can be stabilized. Public control of Finance of course has its own problems….unless its policies are directly and reciprocally beneficial to both the individual and enterprise….like the 50% retail discount/rebate which is the virtual expression of the new paradigm and a public monetary authority which does not allow libertine financialized speculation.
MMT has the system mechanics of money creation correctly defined. What they don’t see is the above discovery of the power of monetary policy linked directly to retail sale so that price deflation is painlessly and beneficially integrated into profit making systems. They also do not see the actual greatest insight of MMT which is that with the primacy of the new paradigm, i.e. DIRECT CREATION and distribution of credit/money….the government can fund itself without the need for income taxes. Instead they punt on politics and mistakenly advocate for a job guarantee only as the way to increase demand which is completely old paradigm while dismissing the aligned policy of a directly distributed universal dividend which paired with the discount/rebate policy immediately ends poverty. (Of course as an adjunct and aligned policy a job guarantee could be a part of new paradigm thinking for anyone who is having problems with finding purpose in addition to or without employment.)
The paradigm level of thinking. It clarifies, focuses and unites the best reforms.
DT: So, Craig, you’ve not answered my question (“what do you make of what I keep trying to say?
Me: “So, Craig, you’ve not answered my question (“what do you make of what I keep trying to say?”
With all due respect, and I DO respect your prodigious intellect, I think much of what you say is erudite irrelevance by comparison to the clarity and focus that is and that results from genuine paradigm CHANGE perception. I can identify with the problem. Trying to integrate thinking on temporal matters while carrying the burden of simultaneously needing to communicate the necessity of a new paradigm whose nomenclature is identical with traditionally religious thinking is very difficult and problematic especially when science ONLY is the current paradigm for intellectual inquiry.
Money, debt and banks are the essential economic factors that neo-classical economics confuses/ignores. The paradigm of monetary Gifting breaks up the monopolistically contradictory and dominating paradigm of Debt ONLY that private banking/finance currently and problematically enjoys, and if finance/banking as a public utility was thoroughly based upon and focusedly aligned with policy and regulations reflecting Gifting and the natural philosophical concept and ethic-zeitgeist of grace from which the concept of Gifting is derived….then the trinity of factors at the beginning of this paragraph could become part of a thirdness greater oneness that is the signature of Wisdom, grace and paradigm change.