Bank of Canada Governor says US economy will never recover.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by David Newman

Do I have dictator like control?

I'd do this:

Job bank providing unlimited 8-9.00/hr jobs for anyone who wants to work.

Hired by the government? To do what?

Indefinite FICA moratorium

Then, how do you pay for the above?

Totally revamped health care system providing anyone over 18 with 5k per year to spend on medical expenses. The unused balance is given to people to use how they wish. Anything above 5k is handled by Medicare/Medicaid. Kids under 18 are covered by Medicare/Medicaid.

Interesting.

Take the burden of healthcare of of businesses.

Now, that is a good point. I've said this myself, concerning "Single Payer"?

Id run a large ad campaign to educate the public on our monetary system.

Good luck. This is the same public that still thinks throwing more money at the super-rich creates jobs and mailing checks to Pat Robertson will prevent earthquakes that are caused by sodomy.

Make states play on a level playing field to encourage companies to establish roots in the community to curtail our countries race to the bottom.

You must be from Michigan.

More to come...

Interesting plan, Dave.

Dave

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by hillbilly

Without raising taxes, how would you fund the above?

First, taxes and borrowing don't fund government spending.

Government spending injects money into the economy. Taxes remove money from the economy. When unemployment is at 8% plus, it's a sure sign there is not enough money in the economy to stimulate demand. With a fiat currency system in a sovereign nation with monopolistic power over the issuing of currency, the act of simply issuing more currency doesn't by default cause inflation. Inflation will eventually occur when unemployment reduces to a level that is reaching full employment and the you either reduce spending or increase taxes to slow the economy down. The government could inject 500B into the economy tomorrow without effecting the value of the money you have in your wallet. If we were on a fixed currency system, that wouldn't be the case, however.

If you ever have too much time on your hands, go to an IRS office and pay your taxes in cash. They will promptly shred the money that you give them, it doesn't go into some account called revenue at the Federal level. It's just removed. When you pay taxes with your checking account, they just adjust the balance in the account down. It doesn't get moved anywhere.

As far as how do you pay for it? The job bank pays for itself quickly, all of those people who can't participate in the job market now suddenly have jobs and can buy things. In the job bank I propose, you'd never have the opportunity for getting a raise, the idea is to employ people because people who are working are more employable than those who are unemployed. You are a mechanic, you get a job as a mechanic and immediately become more attractive to the private sector. A similar plan used in Argentina provided 2M jobs within months in a population of 27M. Within 18 months, over one million of those jobs transitioned to the private sector. It was far less costly than unemployment and provides a couple of serious advantages. People who are working and making things are contributing to output as well as earning their wages. They are also potentially acquiring skills.

The health care reform I propose get rids of billions of dollars in waste, encourages real competition at medical practices, takes away the burden of health care from businesses, and takes medical decisions out of for profit corporations and puts those decisions in the hands of you and I and encourages and rewards people for being healthy. The concern here is that some people don't have the knowledge to make informed decisions, so there will be doctors taking advantage of those people. There is the secondary concern of people who would bypass important treatment for the extra thousand dollars at the end of the year.

That's just the start, but from a government spending perspective, I would predict it to be a wash at worst.

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by David Newman
Do I have dictator like control?

I'd do this:

Job bank providing unlimited 8-9.00/hr jobs for anyone who wants to work.

Hired by the government? To do what?

Would you like a personal assistant to take care of your household? Do you want your lawn mowed? Maybe you have a project at home that needs to be completed, kitchen remodel? The message is that there is infinite capacity to add jobs to the economy. As soon as those people have jobs and make money, they will add to aggregate demand and stimulate private sector growth, when the private sector grows, they'll hire people to satisfy the demand generated.

Indefinite FICA moratorium

Then, how do you pay for the above?

No need to worry until we approach full employment and when we do, not only are most of the issues taken care of by attaining full employment, but our primary concern will be shifted on how to slow the economy down. You reinstate FICA, and preferably, make the percentge float like an interest rate to control the economy.

Totally revamped health care system providing anyone over 18 with 5k per year to spend on medical expenses. The unused balance is given to people to use how they wish. Anything above 5k is handled by Medicare/Medicaid. Kids under 18 are covered by Medicare/Medicaid.

Interesting.

Take the burden of healthcare of of businesses.

Now, that is a good point. I've said this myself, concerning "Single Payer"?

Id run a large ad campaign to educate the public on our monetary system.

Good luck. This is the same public that still thinks throwing more money at the super-rich creates jobs and mailing checks to Pat Robertson will prevent earthquakes that are caused by sodomy.

That's the rub, isn't it? It would be a country wide re-education process and I'd start with Congress.

Make states play on a level playing field to encourage companies to establish roots in the community to curtail our countries race to the bottom.

You must be from Michigan.

More to come...

I am and with any luck, I always will be. Our government should be about serving public purpose and letting the race to the bottom continue doesn't help the country.

Most of my ideas are blatantly stolen from Warren Mosler with some very slight tweaking.

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by merrylander

Isn't that what the U.S. Mint is for?

Kind of. Operationally speaking, government spending is "printing money", taxation is removing or "unprinting money".

[David Newman]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

LMAO!

Hey, do we get to kill the dictator if we don't like him?

Pete

Don't kill the dictator, he is a wise and compassionate god king with a giant head. Killing him could cause a gigantic earthquake that could destroy the world. And with the god king reference, I think I need to watch 300 again.

[David Newman]

BTW, here is something to always keep in mind. The federal government doesn’t ever “have” or “not have” any dollars.

And another for good measure that I may have said in a recent thread. "If there is a dollar in your pocket, it exists because government spent it."

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by David Newman

I am and with any luck, I always will be. Our government should be about serving public purpose and letting the race to the bottom continue doesn't help the country.

Most of my ideas are blatantly stolen from Warren Mosler with some very slight tweaking.

My comment about Michigan was tongue in cheek. Former Ohioan myself. Ended up in VA after a four year stint in the Navy. (Have relatives here. + I like being near the ocean.)

Anyways, I am in agreement with your "race to the bottom" statement. Don't see how allowing our heavy industry go down the toilet and replacing it with high unemployment and low wage service jobs is supposed to be anything but bad.

Unless you're an employer, of course...................

But, not even then, if you think it all of the way through. (Someone has to be able to buy the goods and services. Wouldn't you think?)

Dave

[David Newman]

Dave, no worries, I took it as a tongue in cheek comment.

It's quite a dichotomy that is created in our system. I think it's feasible that at a macroeconomic level, we could get some level of agreement among parties. The trouble is that business is run at a micro-economic level and the rules are different down there. What's good for the individual can absolutely be bad for the whole and it's my opinion that the purpose of government is to serve public purpose, not individual purpose. Corporations and individuals, as a general rule, will only (and always) only look out for their own good and government's role in the economy is to set up an infrastructure that supports microeconomic successes while benefiting the population as a whole.

[BlueStreak]

I kinda see it in this loosely defined fashion;

At the macroeconomic level the system could be viewed as a closed loop.
Those at the top in business and government do the wheeling and dealing that creates
employment (Or not.). Those in the middle run the businesses. Those of us at the bottom do the actual work that creates the revenue that goes back to the top. Repeat process. (However, being the largest segment of society, us bottom feeders also make up a huge percentage of the consumer base.)

Disproportionate favor granted to any sector, or "class" if you will, can and usually does lead to problems elsewhere.

The wildcard, IMO, is the small business owner. He is often the owner, manager and to some greater or lesser degree the workforce as well. A totally different game.

As another uncle of mine, who was a self employed HVAC and refridgeration guy, was a good example. The most lucrative jobs in his neck of the woods (Northern Minnesota) in the 1960s were the unionized steel plants and railroads. At that time the unions would only allow union contractors to bid on work at those facilities. So, my uncle went down to the Teamsters Hall and joined. "I'm pretty sure there won't be any trouble. Not planning to go on strike against myself anytime soon." He made a pretty good living, BTW.

Dave

[David Newman]

I'd say it's even simpler. That money *never* goes back to the top. It's simply removed from the economy.