Its all about the monetary paradigm. MMT is an excellent insight and palliative reform, but why settle for a palliative when a genuine paradigm change based on the history of conceptual changes is possible???

The democrats don’t recognize the power of a paradigm change probably because they fear the head of the oligarchy, namely Finance, but also out of lack of understanding what paradigms actually are. The republicans DO understand power, but they’re captured by Finance and the rest of the oligarchy as well.

But what if a new monetary paradigm of Gifting is the thing that Marx’s “rebellion of the bourgeisie” never cognited on and so never accomplished? Mathematically doubling the demand for every actually productive enterprise’s goods and services with a 50% Discount/Rebate at retail sale, a universal dividend at age 18 for life and a 50% Gift of interest/Debt Jubilee to the borrower at point of loan signing has to:

1) make every business from the Mom and Pop to Wal Mart stand up and cheer,

2) immediately enable a mass socio-economic and political movement of every citizen whose purchasing power has just been doubled and resolved their biggest bitch by transforming chronic inflation into beneficial price and asset deflation and

3) even the banks would have problems refusing the proposition that they get 50% of the interest on a 30 yr. mortgage up front as revenue/profit they could stick directly into their pockets.

Paradigm changes are ENTIRE PATTERN changes that resolve the anomalous present paradigm by applications that completely invert temporal universe reality. Once you realize that, suggesting palliative reforms instead is actually exposed as a cowardly and unethical act.

Charlie: Your assertions are fundamentally flawed. First, the idea that we can “just print more money” to cover the interest on our debt, let alone fund all federal obligations, is both impractical and legally constrained. The debt ceiling exists to limit how much the government can borrow, and printing money indiscriminately to bypass this would violate longstanding fiscal policies and laws.

Even if we chose to raise or eliminate the debt ceiling to avoid default, printing excessive money would be far from a solution. Do you genuinely believe flooding the market with printed dollars resolves the issue? If so, you’re ignoring critical economic consequences and demonstrating a lack of understanding of global finance.

Let’s break it down:

1. Credibility and Confidence: Printing excessive money undermines trust in U.S. financial stability, which could increase borrowing costs and potentially jeopardize the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency. Without this status, the U.S. would face significantly higher costs to borrow and trade globally.

2. Inflation: A massive influx of printed money into the economy would devalue the dollar, sparking inflation or even hyperinflation. This diminishes purchasing power and hurts American consumers, especially those in lower-income brackets.

3. Spending vs. Debt: While debt itself isn’t inherently bad—it allows for investment and growth—the problem lies in unchecked government spending. Addressing runaway spending is far more critical than printing money or accruing more debt without a clear plan to manage it.

In conclusion, reducing spending, not just accumulating debt, is the real issue. Suggesting that we can ignore these risks or casually print our way out of trouble shows a lack of seriousness about the complexities of modern economic systems.

Me: No offense, but thats all of the delusions of neo-classical orthodoxies wrapped up into one post. Do yourself a favor and take Cousin’s advice and read Hudson etc. and you’ll have a good idea of the systemic problems. Then read my book https://www.amazon.com/Wisdomics-Gracenomics-New-Monetary-Paradigm-Policies/dp/B08X7MZ4KH/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1552358772&sr=1-1-catcorr and then you’ll have the specific idea that applied will resolve those problems.