by Summary:
Policy choices. My policy solution is that economic liberalism and political liberalism are incompatible. So-called capitalism (including capital and land ownership) cannot coexist with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community. The economic system that corresponds with so-called capitalism is plutocratic oligarchy, for which there is ample evidence in sociology and political theory. The economic system that corresponds with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community is so-called socialism. Choice between them is a value judgment, and in actuality such choices are generally made based on power relationships in social groups. I would define "capitalism" as the range of economic systems that
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Policy choices. My policy solution is that economic liberalism and political liberalism are incompatible. So-called capitalism (including capital and land ownership) cannot coexist with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community. The economic system that corresponds with so-called capitalism is plutocratic oligarchy, for which there is ample evidence in sociology and political theory. The economic system that corresponds with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community is so-called socialism. Choice between them is a value judgment, and in actuality such choices are generally made based on power relationships in social groups. I would define "capitalism" as the range of economic systems that
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Matias Vernengo writes Elon Musk (& Vivek Ramaswamy) on hardship, because he knows so much about it
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Klas Eklunds ‘Vår ekonomi’ — lärobok med stora brister
New Economics Foundation writes We need more than a tax on the super rich to deliver climate and economic justice
Robert Vienneau writes Profits Not Explained By Merit, Increased Risk, Increased Ability To Compete, Etc.
My policy solution is that economic liberalism and political liberalism are incompatible. So-called capitalism (including capital and land ownership) cannot coexist with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community.
The economic system that corresponds with so-called capitalism is plutocratic oligarchy, for which there is ample evidence in sociology and political theory. The economic system that corresponds with genuine democracy as rule of, by and for the people based on egalitarian community is so-called socialism.
Choice between them is a value judgment, and in actuality such choices are generally made based on power relationships in social groups.
I would define "capitalism" as the range of economic systems that favor capital over people, and "socialism" is the range of economic systems that favor people and the environment over capital (including capital and land ownership). But the devil is in the details, especially since under the present configuration in most of the developed world, capital controls the power and determines institutional arrangements and application.
Considered as an analytical tool that studies various monetary systems and their economic and financial implications under different institutional arrangements, MMT is policy neutral, since it is chiefly descriptive.
As an macroeconomic theory that prioritizes full employment, it is value-based. Prioritizing full employment favors workers (the majority of people in most societies) over capital (ownership of means of production and finance dominated by a few).
Other economic theories that claim to be more "naturalistic" do not make such an assumption but leave outcomes to so-called free markets in models that relegate government to the function of umpire with laissez-faire as the basic rule. However, privileging "naturalism" over, e.g., system regulation based on "control theory," is also a value judgment. Proponents of such systems view MMT as socialistic.
On the other hand, some critics argue that MMT economists in general assume a capitalist model and stay pretty in the box.