Noam Chomsky: ''The Federal Reserve'' & (Mod.Repubs to New Dems.)

[DeSwiss]

The Chomsky Videos * Published on Oct 25, 2013

- The other professorial sages of our greatest colleges and universities who build our bombs and guns and GMOs, we listen to.

This guy?, not so much......

[Enthusiast]

1. K&R! Please watch this video!

If not for rampant stupidity, we could easily correct our problems.

[newfie11]

2. If only more in politics were like this guy

Unfortunly we are going full stream into the abyss.
The majority in this country are to busy with their personal affairs to even notice or listen.

[DeSwiss]

3. Not possible.

The people in politics are elected to office by a majority of we of the sheeple, most of whom are thoroughly brainwashed. Our diets of industrialized-manufactured foods make it impossible for us to make full use of our mental faculties. That's why we've got all the alphabet attention disorders out there (the cures are even worse than the diseases). So of course we can't pay attention long enough to listen to Noam here. Not unless there's Prozac involved. Then it makes no sense.

Our ''educations'' (ha-ha!) amount to the memorization of trivia lists (in case we might make it to a teevee game show, I guess). But surely not to actually think for ourselves. People like that just cause problems later. So it's best not to encourage thinking.

And we're are also daily hypnotized and bombarded with visuals, sounds and shiny bright lights and colors on our teevees and our computers and our smartphones to make our brains pay attention to what's being sold (like good little lab rats). The shocks to one's system via ridicule, ostracism and even homelessness are awaiting those who fail to adequately participate in the Debts To Prosperity Game.

Like making sausages, it's not pretty to watch.

- But this is how Consent is Manufactured. Whether it's a soda, GMO'd hamburgers or, ''Change We Can Believe In......''

[Dustlawyer]

4. K&R!!!

[raouldukelives]

5. K&R

[vlyons]

6. trannscript please?

anyone know a link to a transcript that I can read?

[DeSwiss]

7. Here ya go!

YouTube
Noam Chomsky on "The Federal Reserve" (2013)
The Chomsky Videos

Transcript
0:00 from the line on the right thank you don't

0:03 Thank you doctor Chomsky for taking my question...
0:06 questions about the debt ceiling it's become increasingly obvious that we're
0:09 in a lot of trouble here
0:11 but also becoming obvious to everyone
0:14 that the Federal Reserve Bank that issues the currency is
0:18 owned by a bunch of private bankers so my question to you
0:21 is do you think it wouldn't remedy the situation at all to return
0:26 the power printing money initialing currency to the people the United States

0:34 frankly I there's a lot of feeling about that
0:37 but I S really think it's misguided I don't think the problem is spreading
0:42 fiat currency that sir let me just
0:45 in a muddy I me if you eliminate capitalism you know
0:48 okay then there are other options banana but
0:52 the effects but thats
0:55 not on the agenda we have a state capitalist economy
1:00 maybe in the long term it can be worn away
1:03 may be overthrown hope so but the issue now
1:06 is howdy a function in a sensible state capitalist economy
1:11 and you cannot do that without a central bank that controls currently
1:15 in fact if it wasn't for the Federal Reserve's ability to print money
1:21 we'd be in a deep depression right now worse the pressure in the nineteen
1:26 thirties
1:26 and what's you no sense
1:29 the sensible thing isn't being done for political reasons the sensible thing
1:35 would be creating demand by government investment
1:40 but for reasons that go into that's not being done
1:44 in our state capitalist economy the only alternative
1:48 is the one that frankie is used and if it wasn't for their option we would be
1:53 in a deep depression
1:54 know what's the debt ceiling issue well thats
1:58 your first of all it should be recognized that
2:02 the debt is not a serious problem certainly the deficit is not a serious
2:07 problem
2:08 unlearned long-term problems about the debt
2:12 but they are so remote they don't bear on policy
2:16 as far as the Deaf it is concerned deficit is concerned remember that's not
2:20 the same did that
2:21 a a as Clinton left office
2:25 it's not that long ago we had a surplus no deficit
2:29 miss not deep structural problem
2:32 the current deficit as the result love bush's
2:36 tax cut the crazy words a the
2:39 virtually criminal behavior the corporate system that led to the
2:42 financial
2:43 the housing crisis finally financial crisis dollar that has increased the
2:48 deficit
2:48 but not at our site the officers who
2:52 crucial seek lining and its it could it would be overcome by actual growth
2:57 I'm in the as the government
3:00 economic offices bureau's budget and so on Monday
3:04 calculate that this bet a trillion dollars love
3:07 unused capacity I mean the real problem with the economy
3:12 is not the debt and the deficit it's the fact that the economy is so
3:17 kind of group test that you have tens of millions of people
3:22 morning to work and not able to
3:26 you have huge financial resources occur for
3:30 the corporation's don't know what to do with their money huge profits huge bank
3:35 profits
3:35 there's an enormous amount that has to be done
3:39 just walk around any city you can't think I've a million things that have to
3:43 be done in all kind you know
3:45 just the numerator mint will so huge number vital
3:49 hands and numerous resources tremendous amount of work that has to be done
3:54 and the economy is so dysfunctional can put them together
3:57 that's the problem and is destroying a generation of young people
4:02 it's a harming severely harming the economy
4:06 under current circumstances the way others pretty well-known
4:10 it's too stimulate the economy through government dimensions corporations
4:15 aren't doing in
4:16 and two devalue the dollar so that we import less an expert more
4:22 these are methods that her technically feasible
4:26 but not politically feasible and I think we have to ask about that
4:31 so what's the dysfunction government about
4:35 well for one thing it's called the polarization
4:39 love the party's that's just not accurate I mean what's had think about
4:42 what's happened in the United States
4:44 you the man about fifty years and the United States was described
4:49 not not incorrectly
4:52 as a one-party state the business party
4:56 with two factions called Democrats and Republicans
4:59 most pretty accurate but something changed
5:03 no time to talk about it but my last roughly generation
5:07 30-35 years has been significant change in the economy
5:11 and its lead to a change in the political organizations
5:15 we're still a one-party state business party we still have two factions
5:20 but they're not Democrats and Republicans one faction
5:24 is moderate republicans
5:28 work all democrats so the democrats today are
5:32 pretty much the moderate republicans have a generation ago
5:35 know people say modern problems disappear no they haven't
5:39 they've just become democrats and the other
5:42 faction was mobile as the two parties drifted to the right
5:48 a the republicans just went off the edge
5:52 they became the party love the very rich in the corporate sector
5:57 well you can't get votes that way so they were compelled
6:01 to turn to the sect kinds of sectors of the population that I was
6:06 describing before which were always there but we're not mobilized as a
6:10 political force
6:12 know the people terrified that somebody's coming after them
6:15 the religious extremists that people hate science crews were those guys know
6:21 on so on and so forth that those are the sectors a
6:25 that's the base is the republican party and with no
6:28 unless the second faction the
6:31 if you look at the business pages now the corporate sector is very concern
6:36 that they can't control their base they can no longer control
6:41 these personal care if they destroy the economy who cares
6:44 you know we can win the Civil War you know God will help us whatever it is
6:49 they just don't care and it's a it's a very unusual situation
6:54 but that's the that's the rough political system in the United States
6:59 those
7:00 some counterparts it's kind of similar to
7:04 something that happened in late weimar germany
7:07 when the German industrialists for
7:10 that they could use the nazis as a battering ram
7:15 against labor the left
7:18 and the figure than they could control them turned out they couldn't
7:22 couldn't control them and you know what happened this is not
7:27 Weimar Germany but is a striking similarity
7:30 and that's the dysfunction that's what's happening in Washington
7:34 that's where the world that's why the World Bank and the IMF for
7:38 pleading with the united states to try to act like a civilized society
7:43 you know because we may bring down the global economy with these two factions
7:48 that's a serious problem florida is right in the middle so you guys see it
7:52 all around

[freedom fighter jh]

8. Why? How?

What is Chomsky's basis for saying we'd be in a deep depression if we didn't have the Fed controlling currency? What is it that the Fed does that government cannot do?

[DeSwiss]

10. That's not ''exactly'' what he said. n/t

[freedom fighter jh]

12. Then what exactly did he say?

Copied and pasted from the transcript:

1:06 is howdy a function in a sensible state capitalist economy
1:11 and you cannot do that without a central bank that controls currently
1:15 in fact if it wasn't for the Federal Reserve's ability to print money
1:21 we'd be in a deep depression right now worse the pressure in the nineteen
1:26 thirties

My first post was not an exact quote. I did not use quotation marks and I'm not sure why you did. (What did you mean by the quotes around "exactly"?)

Let me rephrase, then: Why is the Fed's ability to print money [a phrase that I hate, because most money never sees paper format, never gets literally printed] essential to keeping us out of a depression? Chomsky does not say.

*Of course* we need new money being created all the time. I think the questioner is asking why that can't be the purview of government instead of the Fed. I've heard that question asked many times, have never heard a good answer to it.

[DeSwiss]

13. Context.

He was remarking that the reality is that we're in a fiat economy now. And one that was purposefully designed (by law) to function the way it does. And that to direct energies toward a political solution like reassigning where the money is printed, is ''misguided.'' I don't support this system under any set of circumstances, and yet I find myself agreeing with him.

Would you want the current Congress deciding who sits on their Board of Governors? John Boehner? The Tea Party? Okay? Granted, that's not much worse than having the likes of Jamie Dimon on there either. But this is the hand we have now. Is what he's saying.

Chomsky is no raving capitalist. Quite the opposite. But he is a realist. He is saying that the difficulty level in achieving this is too high and won't work because of the forces set against it. He believes that it would make more sense to concentrate efforts on using the structure ''as is'' and simply going into debt funding projects and spend our way out. Fund projects. Build bridges. New schools. New smart highways. He's old school, an FDR kind guy.

If you listen closely, he also remarked just after that with: ''if you eliminate capitalism, then okay maybe there are other options but that's not on the agenda we have a state capitalist economy. Maybe in the long term it can be worn away, maybe overthrown, I hope so but the issue now is how do you function in a sensible state capitalist economy.''

But all this is sound and fury as The Great Ponzi collapses. The only difference in this Ponzi scheme and all the other ones they used to run back in the day, is that these con men control the money supply. They own The House. They can't lose.

- Which is exactly why it's collapsing: GREED.


Resource-based Economy

[freedom fighter jh]

14. The question is "Why is the Fed's ability to print money essential to keeping us out . . .

. . . of a depression"?

Thank you for your admonition to listen closely. I'll translate that into advice to read closely. And no matter how closely I read, I cannot relate your answer to the question. I didn't say anything about eliminating capitalism. I just asked how he came to the conclusion that we need the Fed to keep us out of a depression.

I don't think the questioner (you know, the guy who asked why not eliminate the Fed -- not me) was trying to suggest that John Boehner or anyone else appoint the Fed's board of governors. That's because if the Fed is eliminated it will not have a board of governors.

Yes, we are in a fiat economy now. I am not trying to make suggestions about keeping that or not keeping it. I'm just looking for an answer to a simple question: What is Chomsky's basis for saying we need the Fed printing money to keep us out of a depression? Maybe you don't know the answer. Why should you be able to read Chomsky's mind? But since you posted this video and Chomsky does make that assertion, I thought this is a good place to ask the question.

Since he doesn't offer a reason, I'm kinda guessing he doesn't have one. Maybe he just asserted it without basis. But I don't know that for sure.

[DeSwiss]

15. You straining at gnats here.

Chomsky would prefer it, if capitalism were eliminated altogether.

So. Do. I.

Likewise, his answer ''in this particular instance'' was one of many after a full lecture. Some of the things he discussed it was apparent had been discussed previously or were not to be a part of the discussion, which he mentions briefly.

Here's the bottom line: Don't waste time changing a lousy system, in the mean time while you're still in that system -- this is what you do now to fix things until you've change it.

- If you haven't read him or heard his lectures then I can understand you're not knowing who he is and what he's all about.

[DanTex]

16. There are a few things here.

First is the claim that money needed to be printed in order to keep us out of a deeper depression. I'm not sure if you disagree with this. As Chomsky said, the government should have increased demand through public investment, but it didn't do that, so the only other option available was to flood the economy with money and lower interest rates in an attempt to get people to spend. That's what Bernanke and QE were about.

The second question is why does the Fed have to be the one printing money, why not some other part of the government. Well, one answer here is that it doesn't matter if it's called the "Fed" or the "Blah Blah Blah", the fact is that the government entity in charged of managing the fiat currency needed to be printing money, so if the Fed wasn't there than whatever was there to replace it would have had to act.

A third question is why isn't the Fed controlled directly by elected representatives, rather than by appointed governors the way it is now. And the answer here is to prevent manipulation of the currency for political ends. For example, if the president or congress directly controlled the money supply, it would be very tempting to print a lot of money right before elections in order to temporarily boost employment before the election. In the current situation, if the Fed were controlled by congress, we probably wouldn't have had as much easing of the money supply because the Republicans in congress have mostly bought into nutty right-wing economic theories. Most of them have been predicting runaway inflation for many years now, inflation that hasn't happened. So it's a good thing to have a central bank independent of political pressures.

[freedom fighter jh]

17. Your second question is what I'm talking about.

An important question on which I cannot find an authoritative answer is whether the Federal Reserve is a public or private institution. Perhaps the question is not which it is but how much of each it is. You referred to it as a "government entity." I know the president selects the chair, but I heard he picks from a short list created by the Fed. If that's true, the president's choice is pretty meaningless. Certainly there are bankers on the Fed's board, and they benefit from the system we have, in which money is created by borrowing and the interest on the loans that create money goes to the Fed or to banks, not to the public.

I think part of what people are trying to get at when they say "End the Fed" is to promote a way of creating money that benefits the people, not the banks. You have pointed out some real problems with other methods of money creation. I wonder if there is a way around those problems that still leaves the important decisions about money in the hands of people who work in the public interest.

And I still wonder why Chomsky said that without the Fed we'd have a deep depression, or whatever it was. If the Fed weren't there, there are lots of other ways things could look, so I don't know how he knows just what the system would look like and what would come from that.

[Pharaoh]

9. Capitalism, hopefully we'll overthrow it

I love how he slipped that in.

[DeSwiss]

11. I caught that too!