Construction spending data leading to lower Q1 GDP estimates
Posted by WARREN MOSLER on April 2nd, 2012
The Center of the Universe
St Croix, United States Virgin Islands
MOSLER'S LAW: There is no financial crisis so deep that a sufficiently large tax cut or spending increase cannot deal with it.-
MMT: Taxes function to regulate aggregate demand, and not to raise revenue per se.
Warren’s Book:
Buy it or read it free online!
"The most important book ever written" -Elizabeth O'ToolRecent Posts
- Fed re fiscal drag
- housing starts
- health care inflation slowing
- Fitch says China credit bubble unprecedented…
- retail sales year over year
- Summary and Critique of the Warren Mosler (MMT) vs. Bob Murphy (Austrian) Debate. | Heretical Druthers
- tsy tax collections
- Italian Press
- JOBS DECELERATING!
- US Auto Sales Total Annualized SA Analysis
-
The funds to pay taxes and buy government securities come from government spending.
Subscribe To:
Links
Internet Life
April 3rd, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Hi Warren,
MMT-OWS unity!
We would love to have in late June at Occupy Dallas.
We are going to begin petitioning the city/county for the removal of public funds from TBTF institutions.
We could use your expertise.
Thanks,
Charles
Occupy Dallas Bank Action
Reply
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 3rd, 2012 at 3:50 pm
looking at being there June 23 for a few hours if that works?
Also, removing public funds from any bank is pointless.
Those funds don’t help the bank.
Nor are the banks actually too big to fail.
Failure means the stock holders and other uninsured creditors lose all when the banks capital goes negative.
Nothing ever stops the FDIC from doing that.
And the FDIC is then free to replace management as well.
My proposal is along the lines where a bank has to apply to grow,
and the criteria would be lower fees and lower rates for borrowers due to economies of scale.
;)
Reply
Yuu Kim Reply:
April 3rd, 2012 at 4:33 pm
@WARREN MOSLER,
which remains me–i’m kinda curious as to how you would respond to this proposal from your good friend, Roger Mitchell:
http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2012/03/roger-mitchell-on-bank-nationalization.html
Reply
Alex The Great Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 12:35 am
“Free Banking” would mean anyone could create at currency currency and an entire competing financial system if they so desire.
The “privatize banking” crowd does not want “free banking” they simply want a monopoly in banking for the chosen few mega-banks, backed by the taxpayers, and protected by paid off government officials.
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:25 pm
I think I’m ok with free banking if that’s how it’s defined. the umkc buckaroo would be free banking, and seems to me it’s a good thing
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:19 pm
I’ll stick with my banking proposals
http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8968
Art Patten Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 9:54 am
@WARREN MOSLER,
“…and the criteria would be lower fees and lower rates for borrowers due to economies of scale.”
Sacrilege! :)
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 3rd, 2012 at 6:13 pm
@Charles Hayden,
Do you support unwinding the Big 4?
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 3rd, 2012 at 6:51 pm
@Charles Hayden,
See, we need your expertise.
June 23rd is great.
Reply
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:23 pm
good, will work around it.
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:22 pm
I’d have to identify specific public purpose in doing that.
and with my ‘narrow banking’ proposals they wouldn’t be allowed to do all that much so i suspect the issue would go away
http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8968
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 12:35 pm
@WARREN MOSLER,
I just think of Bill Black…..”cheaters go in a different category.”
April 3rd, 2012 at 7:44 pm
@Charles Hayden,
I thought deposits were a source of funds for the settlement process?
Bill Mitchell: The role of bank deposits in MMT
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=14620
“Deposits do not fund loans. But they are one source of funds that the bank has available to ensure that its role in the settlement process is not compromised which would require borrowing from the central bank.”
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 9:12 am
@Charles Hayden,
I think understand. Local government deposits do not form a consistent deposit base. And if reserves are needed they can be borrowed off the interbank market.
I’m think we should push for a responsible banking ordinance, like the one recently passed by Seattle, calling for the city to “examine banking and investment practices, home-foreclosure patterns, and the financing of local elections.”
What do you think?
Reply
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:27 pm
have a read of this, thanks
http://www.moslereconomics.com/?p=8968
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 12:37 pm
@WARREN MOSLER,
I’ve probably read it a dozen times; each time it makes more sense.
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 9:14 pm
good to hear that!
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 4th, 2012 at 10:24 pm
if a bank makes a loan which creates a deposit, and that deposit stays with your bank, the banks balance in its fed reserve account doesn’t change, even though its deposits went up
Reply
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
@WARREN MOSLER,
Our revised petition:
“We, the Residents of the City of Dallas, demand that the City Council examine the banking, lending, and investment practices of financial institutions utilized by the City for the management of public funds. In addition, we demand an examination of their home-foreclosure practices and their political contributions to our local elections. Furthermore, we have lost confidence in so called Too-Big-Too-Fail banks, such as Bank of America, J.P. Morgan-Chase, Wells Fargo, Citibank, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs, and we demand the establishment of a financial reform committee to examine ways that the City can avoid using the financial services of these institutions.”
Reply
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 9:18 pm
better, but how about a committee to determine if public purpose is served by allowing those particular large banks?
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 10:13 pm
@Charles Hayden,
yeah, but that’s federal level….
we want our local government to step up…do what it can to put pressure on Congress to act.
OD began with a march on the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
Now, we can’t take credit for the recent progress of their enlightenment, but we can damn sure can say that we speak truth to power.
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 6th, 2012 at 1:48 am
what does the dallas fed actually do apart from maybe clearing checks and funding ‘research’?
Charles Hayden Reply:
April 6th, 2012 at 8:33 am
@Charles Hayden,
Well they were advocates of hard money and self-regulation.
WARREN MOSLER Reply:
April 9th, 2012 at 10:39 pm
ok, i agree they talk a lot, but have very little ability, if any, to actually do anything more than talk
April 4th, 2012 at 9:09 pm
Great Research!
Reply
April 5th, 2012 at 8:34 am
OT
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1523.aspx
We now have a “profit” of $18 billion on TARP. When does the Treasury issue dividend checks to the taxpayers???
Reply
roger erickson Reply:
April 5th, 2012 at 3:48 pm
@Newbie,
:) best laugh all day;
our dividend is the good work done by all our Congresspeople who “saved” the economy by obtaining that currency for the Treasury to use
gotta stop, or I’ll talk myself outta that laugh
Reply