Відео

His assumptions are well because he explains that k percent theory of Friedman does not have real impact in life. Through years money supply grew at low or 0% interest rates and inflation was stable. Money is also debt literally - sectorial bilance of wille godley. He just reassumes the ideas that mainstream economist avoid because it does not fit their models. There are others who see same things as him like ray Dalio, Richard vague,, Richard Koo, Warren b mosler. Although he presents it with most political detail. He knows how EU system works, he studied history of economical ideas and has in my idea much to pass with regards to information.

Yeah, this video strikes me as a diatribe of "Why does everyone disagree with me when all my ideas are correct?" He's not comparing theories, he's just strawmanning the ideas he doesn't like. The answer to his title question is "look in the mirror". As for your point (which I agree with) about economists not really understanding what is going on, as opposed to engineering and the hard sciences, is that economics involves that difficult-to-measure entity known as "people". The laws of economics are simple, but people are complicated. So on the one hand, this guy is correct about government being able to print its own money so it's not like a family budget, but Milton Friedman is still correct that if you print bucketloads of money (euphemistically called "stimulus spending"), you'll get inflation. The complication is that there are lots of invisible variables in the causes of inflation. Paul Krugman recently admitted he was wrong about inflation precisely because he didn't see the supply chain problem in advance. My simplistic theory is that the Fed has been very inflationary, but the inflation hides in asset bubbles instead of CPI, and CPI itself stayed low for a long time due to the deflationary aspects of technological advancements and Chinese outsourcing. But combine stimulus spending with supply chain issues and lockdowns in China (removing the Chinese-based deflation) and particularly the tight supply of computer chips (removing the tech-based deflation), you get inflation. That's just my theory based on lots of reading and investigation, in an effort to explain why extremely inflationary policies were causing only minor 1-2% inflation.

@@uumlau I agree with you , a lot of variables changing at the same time. If you do pump in a lot of money you have to get inflation. If you pump in money when the economy is deflating for other reasons then you might just get it right and end up with no deflation and low inflation. If you pump in money when the economy GDP is expanding then more money is needed in the system and there will be no inflation. It is a numbers games better suited to a super computer. To me though inflation should take care of the excess money injected after a period without raising interest rates. If there is 10% more money in circulation than before the injection then 10% inflation should eliminate the excess and then drop back down to a low inflation. Only continued injections should cause continued inflation. I don't know what happened in the 1970's to cause persistent inflation. Bubbles also are not really a bad thing. They are just different sectors growing at different rates. When real estate for instance bubbles up the way it did in 2008, then it is an extreme imbalance. When that happens you can get bubble popping, which is not desirable. So in an ideal world , small bubbles and growing evenly across all sectors is normal growth. It may be impossible to ever come up with a theory of economics because it may be like the weather and unpredictable. Or it may be like the stock market which is unpredictable. Only the bigger picture is predictable like the climate or like long term trends in stock markets. Like the long term economic cycles that Dalio talks about.

Good one. It's like believing there actuallly is a Nirvana - But it never exists anywhere like socialism can never exist anywhere because it will never work so Mark Blyth wants to try it again because this time it will be "different".

which they're only too happy to do,, so what's your point?

@@hemiedwards217 My point is it is getting deeper into debt that causes a melt down when the time finally arrives that you cannot pay back the debt since tax receipts are not big enough to do so. The effect is that either more taxes must be paid for what you have spent in the past and more downward pressure is put on the currency thus effectively reducing the value of people's savings. It matters greatly in countries which have few overseas assets or a net deficit in those assets such as UK. Japan presently still has huge positive net overseas assets which is unusual and this cushions any downward pressure on their currency so the situation is maredly different theer than many other countries with debt. Along with that their government borrowings are mostly internally owed which also differs from most others. .

@@Rob-fx2dw None of that actually matters in this day and age. The financial and fiscal systems of the world are really tightly integrated. The current account balances (surplus/deficits) of the countries balance out. Some countries may indeed have both trade and fiscal deficits, but that's balanced out by those countries like the oil producing nations of the Middle East/Russia and commodities/finished goods producers like China, Germany, Japan, Brazil, Canada, and Argentina. Those who manage the wealth accumulated in those countries either seek security/security, manage their exchange rates, or their economy lacks the capacity to absorb the excess capital so they invest in the Treasuries of nations with current account/trade deficits.

And you're the one who is misinformed about the relationship between public debt and private money creation. Its a well established fact that private banks create deposits in borrower's accounts and bank reserves are created after the fact. "A bank makes a loan to a borrowing customer. This simultaneously, creates a credit and a liability for both the bank and the borrower. The borrower is credited with a deposit in his account and incurs a liability for the amount of the loan. The bank now has an asset equal to the amount of the loan and a liability equal to the deposit. All four of these accounting entries represent an increase in their respective categories: the bank's assets and liabilities have grown, and so has the borrower's. It's worth noting that at least two more types of liabilities are also created at this moment: a reserve requirement is created and a capital requirement is created. These aren't standard financial liabilities. They are regulatory liabilities." www.cnbc.com/id/100497710 "Test­ing the first hypoth­e­sis takes some sophis­ti­cat­ed data analy­sis, which was done by two lead­ing neo­clas­si­cal econ­o­mists in 1990.[3] If the hypoth­e­sis were true, changes in M0 should pre­cede changes in M2. The time pat­tern of the data should look like the graph below: an ini­tial injec­tion of gov­ern­ment “fiat” mon­ey, fol­lowed by a grad­ual cre­ation of a much larg­er amount of cred­it mon­ey: Their empir­i­cal con­clu­sion was just the oppo­site: rather than fiat mon­ey being cre­at­ed first and cred­it mon­ey fol­low­ing with a lag, the sequence was reversed: cred­it mon­ey was cre­at­ed first, and fiat mon­ey was then cre­at­ed about a year lat­er: " www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/

@@hemiedwards217 Of course it matters. Countries have their own currencies and management of them as well as their debt obligations internally and externally. There is not one currency that the whole world operates on. Just look at countries where they have not managed their currencies well like Argentina, Chile, Zimbawe, South Africa, Brazil and a host of others. If there is bad financial management in any country then their debts force the country's exchange rate (the price of one currency compared to another) down so their foreign debts are more difficult to pay off and that has a negative effect on their own people's wealth and their investment opportunities. The balancing out proves that there is a levelling factor between countries in financial terms and this is fluid not fixed. If it all didn't matter as you say then no currency would have failed and never would.

He is an entertainer not an economist of any deep thinking. Example "there is no inflation anywhere". - Only true if you ignore the fact that stock prices have risen dramatically and wiped out the ability of retirees savings accounts to gain anything but a paltry interest rate and put the price of shares so high that they cannot afford to buy sufficient to pay for their retirement. Only if you ignore the fact that efficiencies brought by computerized equipment and managment systems would have over the past thirty years driven prices of consumer goods down but prices have still risen due to the unlying inflation. Of course CPI does not measure this and those using the very limited accuracy of CPI to ascertain inflation rates have been duped into thinking inflation has not occurred.

dude likes a drink

this is a general talk not a university unit lecture

They die of capitalism

@@jacksonthesyndicalist2771 They die of the directionality of that foolish entrainment, more like. You want idiocy? People - even Mark himself - think that "Democracy" doesn't quite behave in the same way.

@@Sakhmeov Ah yes the famous philosopher Karl Mark.

@@jacksonthesyndicalist2771 "It was offside!" Nah, but really. There's a helluva lot of CLO-effect and buildup of that whole "Don't prick the bubble"-think in western rwpublics as well. We haven't figured out how to deleverage these things; all we've done is leverage them against each other. Which then inevitably ends in chaos and either some vile oligopolies or "USSR Two: The Convolutening". Shit's fucked. We're working from just the wrong thought bases to start with. I was long and right some equities for a couple of years there, but now I'm hard into commodities because I know shit's gonna get shot. I just want to build my damn project and then tell the Grid to fuck off...

@@Sakhmeov I have no clue what youre saying? Are you google translating from Indonesian or some shit?