Posted To Mish Shedlock’s Blog

Me:  The new pardigm of Direct Monetary Gifting is NOT socialism and in fact would enable us to immediately eliminate all socialist re-distributive transfer taxes including for social security, and as its discount/rebate policy is strategically implemented at the point of retail sale which is the terminal expression point for all forms of inflation would also pave the way to vastly reduce the “necessity” to limit inflation via business and individual income taxes. Let us have the true “ownership society” with the new paradigm and all of its benefits for business and the individual….instead of the onerously indebted society we have now.

MS:  You have a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech, etc. Not happiness nor free money.

Me:  Correct. Unless you want to escape the complete unworkability and collapse of profit making systems because of ever rising costs due to the ever increasing depreciation costs of ever increasing fixed capital. And then, after you realize that fact, you recognize that direct Monetary Gifting is the only way to save the profit making systems you admire so much. Paradigm changes always entail inversions of orthodoxies.

S: Care to show us, with some precision, how your Feee Gifts from Manna system works? Or is the whole thing, like the entire rest of the progressive canon, nothing more than Newspeakian, undefinable mush? Aimed at making the weak of mind feel good about themselves for being able to regurgitate what they perceive to be impressive sounding words? Words they don’t even understand, much less are able to define with any level of precision.

Me: Sure. You start with a $1000/mo. universal dividend to everyone 18 and older and then implement a policy of a 50% discount to the consumer/rebate of the 50% discount back to the retail merchant gifting it to their consumer. The monetary gifting is created and distributed by a monetary authority specifically mandated to do so. As final retail sale is the terminal expression point for any and all forms of inflation and is also the terminal ending point for the economic process a 50% reduction in price at that point will eliminate any possibility of inflation and will in fact integrate price deflation painlessly and beneficially into profit making systems, double everyone’s potential purchasing power and so also double the free and available amount of individual income for any and all businesses’ products and services so its wonderful for both the individual and enterprise. As hyper inflation never and cannot occur without a specific set of disasterous temporal and economic circumstances and competition is also alive between business models you would not see significant price rises throughout the entire process of creating a product and marketing it, and even if there was some garden variety inflation the discount/rebate percentage could be tweaked/increased to prevent any erosion of purchasing power. Also as I have posted in this thread these policies would end the costs of transfer taxes and almost entirely enable the elimination of corporate and individual income taxes as well so any increase in prices by enterprise would not be justifiable by anything but greed….and individuals and purchasing agents are smart enough to recognize such bad actors and rather quickly they would cease and desist in such anti-social behavior…or rather rapidly lose market share and go out of business.

There are other benefits and “knock on” effects to these policies as well like the ability to re-industrialize America due to the fact that with the dividend and discount policies we wouldn’t need to worry about unemployment. And if we had twice the purchasing power without inflation its obvious that we’d have more employment than if we didn’t have such policies and relied upon the “pulled three ways from the center” policies of liberal or conservative economic orthodoxy. You need to step outside of orthodoxies on both sides to see the efficacy of the new paradigm. And cynicism is just an opportunity to not look.

BM: Whenever some nit-wit mentions that they are in favor of ‘Free education’, I ask them “Who is going to be willing to teach your courses for nothing?” I never seem to get a straight answer.

Me:  No one of course, but if you could teach others at 50% cost to them and yet you could get 100% of your best competitive price with a discount/rebate policy….how many more students and hence more profit as an educator could you make????

MS:  Of course, it’s socialism. It takes money from somewhere and redistributes it. Stop the bullshit.

Me:  Wrong. There’s no RE to it…which is what makes distribution socialistic. Look at it and be honest Mish…or be exposed as an orthodox BS er.

BM:  Sorry, but the Rube Goldberg scheme you have described is very convoluted, but definitely not “free”.

Me:  Not a Rube Goldberg scheme. It’s simply an intelligent and insightful use of the debit-credit nature of one of humanity’s greatest inventions double entry bookkeeping….which just also happens to be the integrated underlying infrastructire of all commerce. That’s why its a new paradigm. Anew paradigm is a new idea that fits seamlessly within and creates a new pattern in the body of knowledge/area of human endeavor the paradigm is applied to. And it IS free, freeing and will make the economy free flowing.

Y:  Trump will deliver a version of himself from the left. The reaction to Trump will be an angry, loud populist of the left. The demographics favor the left. Any acceptance of Trump and his populism, any acceptance whatsoever of him, or destroys the norms and values that protect us from the Sanders’ and Chavez’ of the world. Mish, reconsider your lesser of evils position. Trump never was the lesser of evils, especially relative to HRC but even as to Sanders.

Me:  That is altogether a possibility. What we actually need is the integrative third way, not terminal and brain dead orthodoxies on the left, right or libertarian political and economic perspectives.

K:  It is a strange conundrum — the Democrat Party has effectively controlled much of the country for decades through politics, the bureaucracy, academia, the media; and yet there is no bench strength in the Democrat Party. They have to rely on burned-out ancients like Hillary! and Bernie. There are no shining stars among the Democrat place-holders in the Senate, the House, or the Governorships.

One might have expected the party with an effective lock on power to have attracted able opportunists, at least. But that has not happened. Why?

Me:  Most likely because for the last 30+ years the economy has stagnated and individual incomes have actually declined. Then, with the ultra conservative, neo-secessionist talk radio of Rush Limbaugh and the conspicy mania of Alex Jones the seed was sown for an irrationally tribal constituency that would elect a Trump.

Consider this article from Big Think

The answer to disintegration is not further disintegration, but re-integration of the truths in opposing perspectives. Every word and act out of Trumps mouth is disintegrative as Mish himself has partially chronicled. Trump’s and Bannon’s belief in “The Fourth Turning” is proof of this as the fourth turning is actually just the chaotic result of not accomplishing the thirdness greater oneness of the integration of opposing economic and political truths.

KB: As long as politicians can lie to get elected and people believe the lie (and have the votes that count), such schmucks will keep getting elected.

This is the classic problem everywhere. Guys who create the problem (with such promises) do not get punished. It is not as you sow so you reap. It is someone sows and you reap. The pain is inflicted on others who are not the particpants. Assume a number of prudent people understand that there is no free lunch and vote for a candidate who does not promise it. As long they are in the minority it does not count. The”free lunch” candidate wins.

Me:  Yeah except in the case of a new paradigm of direct Monetary Gifting which no matter how many times Mish yells its socialism it ISN’T socialism because it takes from no one. RE-distributing other people’s money is the definition of socialist RE-distributive taxation so if it does not RE-distribute someone else’s income IT’S NOT socialism. It increases individual incomes and as I pointed out with a high enough percentage discount/rebate policy it absolutely will eliminate the possibility of price inflation. Retail sale is where production becomes consumption and so it is the end of the economic process. If you go to a store and buy $100 worth of groceries has anyone here ever gotten a call from the grocer saying that you owed them another $20? No, because its the end of the economic process. You own the production. So if you do the 50% debit-credit discount/rebate policy at that point you can double everyone’s purchasing power and because the merchant gets his discounts rebated back to him…everyone wins.

ML1/B1:  The monetary gifting you propose is socialism because you take from everybody to give to everybody. Value of dollars would drop and there would be large inflation if your system came to being.

The money you’re “gifting” has to come from somewhere. Either through taxation or printing from thin air. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
Me:  @ML1 @Brian1 You guys are dramatizing the fallacy and misnomer of “monetary” inflation. Does money by itself raise prices? No, the operant, deepest and actual cause of “monetary” inflation….is the complete and utter freedom of commercial decision makers to raise their prices in a system that lacks good rational, ethical and workable order. In other words conservatives, libertarians and neo-liberal economists have mistaken chaos for general equilibrium. When a system is neither bounded on the lower end by costs nor the upper end by price it is by definition chaotic. In the temporal universe there is only freedom amongst known barriers. The policies of Wisdomics-Gracenomics are those of the new paradigm. They fulfill every signature of historical paradigm changes and bring good rational, ethical and workable order to profit making systems in ways that benefit all legitimate economic agents.

RQR:  That wall of text was difficult to go through.What I got out of it was : The government will pay half the cost of a consumer’s spending to merchants up to $1000 total.

You do realize that just because retail is where inflation is expressed to the consumer does not mean you can control it, right? The increased demand will filter back all the way to raw material producers, leading to price increases feeding forward through the various stages of production until the retailer is reached. Your discounts will be applied to ever-increasing prices.

Increasing the discount to account for this is no different than just giving the consumer a escalating quantity of free money to pay for it in terms of end effect. Eventually you would destroy the currency as the government would just be going into deeper and deeper deficit spending to provide this “benefit.”

Me:  That’s why I also advocate a 25% “pass on” discount/rebate policy at the point of sale from one business model to the next in line toward retail sale. That way price deflation is linearized throughout the entire economic process and serial price inflaters would risk losing market share if they inflated because garden variety price inflation is generally only 2-3% due to competition. And any greedy schemes to thwart and/or de-stabilize the system would be rooted out and punished via sin taxation and eventually by getting kicked out of the beneficial system by the new growth/employment area….forensic accounting.

And there is no $1000 limit to the discount. In this system a $30,000 car would cost the consumer $15,000. Money is not the problem. Delusional fallacies like “monetary” inflation are.

BBS: Why is Venezula the example used for progressive socialism? Don’t most of the rest of the advanced democratic economies in the world (Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada) provide mostly free health care, daycare, college, sick and maternity leave? Obviously they have much higher taxes to pay for these services, but they are a long way from failed economies.

Me:  Correct. That’s just this blogs orthodoxy filters in operation. Now having said that as I posted earlier on this thread the truly objective evaluation of democratic socialism is: Democratic Socialism A fatally flawed economic theory and not the basis upon which the new economic paradigm will rest….that presently is in most instances a superior system to live in if you are a human being.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s