Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEver-shifting rationales for an unchanging policy
Bill Gross is at it again, coming up with yet another reason for the Fed to tighten despite a still-depressed economy and inflation falling well below target. He is, of course, not alone it has actually been amazing how wide a variety of reasons people in or close to the financial industry have come up for tight money in an economy that seems to need to opposite. Many of the people making these arguments started with dire warnings about runaway inflation; but when inflation failed to materialize, they didnt change their policy views, they came up with new rationales for doing exactly the same thing.
This kind of behavior ever-shifting rationales for an unchanging policy (see: Bush tax cuts, invasion of Iraq, etc.) is a tell. It says that something else is really motivating the policy advocacy. So what is going on here? When I read Gross and others, what I think is lurking underneath is a belief that capitalists are entitled to good returns on their capital, even if its just parked in safe assets. Its about defending the privileges of the rentiers, who are assumed to be central to everything; the specific stories are just attempts to rationalize the unchanging goal.
The thing to realize here, then, is that nothing about our current situation says that rentiers are entitled to their rent. And its a perversion of alleged free-market thinking to suggest otherwise.
Bear in mind where we are, economically: we are still in a liquidity trap, and we are very much in a paradox of thrift world, where hoarding not spending is a positive social evil...
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/rentiers-entitlement-and-monetary-policy/
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2013/10/29/bill-gross-capitalism-needs-carry/
This kind of behavior ever-shifting rationales for an unchanging policy (see: Bush tax cuts, invasion of Iraq, etc.) is a tell. It says that something else is really motivating the policy advocacy. So what is going on here? When I read Gross and others, what I think is lurking underneath is a belief that capitalists are entitled to good returns on their capital, even if its just parked in safe assets. Its about defending the privileges of the rentiers, who are assumed to be central to everything; the specific stories are just attempts to rationalize the unchanging goal.
The thing to realize here, then, is that nothing about our current situation says that rentiers are entitled to their rent. And its a perversion of alleged free-market thinking to suggest otherwise.
Bear in mind where we are, economically: we are still in a liquidity trap, and we are very much in a paradox of thrift world, where hoarding not spending is a positive social evil...
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/30/rentiers-entitlement-and-monetary-policy/
http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/2013/10/29/bill-gross-capitalism-needs-carry/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 591 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ever-shifting rationales for an unchanging policy (Original Post)
cthulu2016
Nov 2013
OP
Completely true to form. The vexing piece is why folks who should know better keep taking these
TheKentuckian
Nov 2013
#1
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)1. Completely true to form. The vexing piece is why folks who should know better keep taking these
economic ideologues seriously and pretend obvious bullshit has substantial merit if they are not actually in on the game too.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)2. .