The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichael Hudson Archive
Finance Capitalism vs Industrial Capitalism
Imagining How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Are Destroying Us
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Jim Vrettos: Welcome once again to the Radical Imagination. I’m your host, Jim Vrettos. I’m a sociologist whose taught at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Yeshiva University here in New York.

Our guest today on the Radical Imagination is Michael Hudson. He was on our March 8th show. We had such an overwhelmingly positive response to that show that we’ve asked him to return today, and he’s been gracious enough to accept.

Unlike most economists, he’s been a fierce champion and advocate for the economic rights of the poor, workers, disenfranchised and the vulnerable around the world through his scholarship and lifelong activism. His unique economic analysis has explored history’s main engine of economic exploitation – the banking, creditor and financial systems’ ever-increasing extraction of value through interest payments. The rentier class and FIRE sector – Finance, Insurance and Real Estate – have long succeeded in depicting themselves as part of a productive economy. Yet for centuries, these sectors were recognized as being parasitic.

Now with the United States losing some 10 million jobs in just the past two weeks and the world awash in debt, the total world gross domestic product is $90 trillion. The public and private debt is a mind-boggling $260 trillion. The pandemic has given this parasitic sector yet another, even more vicious opportunity to exploit and devour humanity.

As our guest puts it, the recently passed Trump “Bank and Landlord Relief” bill, mistakenly named the Coronavirus bill, starts by providing banks with an even larger giveaway of wealth than they received from Obama in 2008. Helping the banks, financial and real estate sectors in a so-called free market system is conflated with helping the industrial economy and general living standards for most Americans. The essence of a parasite is not only to drain the host’s nourishment, but to dull the host’s brain so that it does not recognize that the parasite is there.

These debt-bondage economies of Western countries are heading us down a spiral of poverty, decline, injustice and human despair.

Michael Hudson is a distinguished research professor of economics at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, a researcher at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, former Wall Street analyst, a political consultant of governments on finance and tax policy, and a popular sought-after commentator and journalist. He’s devoted his entire scientific and historical work to the study of domestic and foreign debt, loans, mortgages and interest payments. His analysis and warnings are even more profoundly necessary in these pandemic days and nights. This is just the first in a series of cascading crises.

Welcome so much. Thank you for being back again here on the Radical Imagination. Michael, it’s great to see you again. How are you doing? I know we’re all trying to keep safe and well and strong. How are things going?

Michael Hudson: I just got back from a walk in Forest Park here in Queens. There was hardly anybody on the streets, but there were a good number of people in the park. I finally was given a face mask by the building’s super, and my Chinese friends say that they’ve mailed me some masks to keep me safe. They’re sending foreign aid to New York like we’re a third world country.

Jim Vrettos: Well, in a sense, we are, aren’t we? We’re turning into it for more and more people. Tell us about this so-called bill that’s just been passed. What is wrong with it in your estimation? How does it perpetuate and exacerbate the problem in your analysis?

Michael Hudson: Well, it’s sort of like Obama’s bailout in 2009 and ’10 on steroids. It’s funny when you read people like Paul Krugman and others Democrats denouncing it all as if it’s a Republican bill, but it’s identical with Obama’s bill and Obama’s philosophy. And it was unanimously passed. Chuck Schumer likened it to Roosevelt’s New Deal. So I think you should think of it as the Trump-Pelosi bill. Trump simply lifted it wholesale from his campaign backers, who basically are the same as the Democratic National Committee.

The problem is that the bill pretends that by giving money to the banks to lend more money to get the country moving again that’s going to rescue the economy. It’s not going to rescue the economy. The bill injures the economy, because the money ends up with the banks. Part of its $10 trillion – $2 trillion – goes to citizens to spend, but ends up largely being paid to the banks and landlords. Specifically, there is an enormous giveaway that makes real estate tax exempt for the next 30 years.

Jim Vrettos: What about small businesses? Are you including them in this analysis?

Michael Hudson: Most small businesses they’re rescuing are the landlords. They have received the most Small Business Administration loans, usually by going through the local political party machine. When the Republicans or Democrats talk about small business, they mean the landlords, who are the proxies for the big real estate interests and the banks behind them.

So let’s look at this: The bill asks landlords to stop evicting people for three months but let the rent accrue, and personal debts also. Let’s look at what’s going to happen when the three months are over. You’re going to have restaurants and small businesses – whose major expense is rent and credit – not having done much business during these three months. They will end up owing this major cost of doing business for three months without having their usual income. What’s going to happen by the end of the summer?

ORDER IT NOW

A lot of restaurants here in Queens only have takeout service. So how are these small businesses going to pay the debts that have mounted up in the last three months? Many will have to go out of business, declare bankruptcy and start all over again, because otherwise all their earnings for this year and next year – and probably the year after that – would have to go to make up the arrears to their landlords, their creditors and the banks.

So what pretends to be a coronavirus bill is going to say, “You think the virus hit you? Wait till we hit you with the financial bill.” The financial bailout aims to enable the financial sector to extract so much money from the economy and drive so many small businesses under that the big venture capital firms and private equity can pick them up at low all prices. You could call it the “Monopolization of the US economy” bill or the “Contributors to Washington politicians” bill.

There was a wish list that the banks had, the real estate interests and corporate lobbyists, that they’d been saving up for just such a crisis opportunity. The coronavirus is equivalent of 9/11. As in 9/11 when President Bush and Cheney pulled out the Patriot Act that they had in their drawer just looking for an excuse. Right now the coronavirus, the Trump-Pelosi bill gives the banks and the real estate sector an excuse to not only be bailed out as if they’re losing money, but to evict their tenants.

Jim Vrettos: To profit even more?

Michael Hudson: Not necessarily profit. Profit you have to pay income tax on. Rich people don’t make profits. They make capital gains. Only the little people make profits.

Jim Vrettos: You said this was conscious on their part, right? This is a rational way in which they think about these things. There’s no moral dilemma to all of this by the large venture capitalists and so on, Wall Street, is that correct?

Michael Hudson: Yes. Obviously the lobbyists have written these laws. Trump is a real estate investor and certainly knows that when it gives the biggest single giveaway to the real estate sector. Real estate will not make a profit for the next 30 or 50 years. But it’ll make enormous cash flow. They’ll call it depreciation. The depreciation schedule pretends that buildings are losing their value even when they’re going way up. It’s an accounting system, including the national income accounts that have little to do with the real economy. So there is no more way to empirically describe what’s happening using official statistics. We’re entering a just-pretend statistical world with a just-pretend rationale and Orwellian euphemisms.

Jim Vrettos: Okay. So moral suasion, what are the limits? You worked with and talked about Rev. William Barber’s Poor People’s Campaign, for example. You talk about Bernie and his movement and so on. Are these designed to fail? Are there possible strategies that can be used to limit the vicious profits and money that’s being made?

Michael Hudson: What’s the connection between moral suasion, Reverend Barber and Bernie?

Jim Vrettos: I guess I’m asking here is who speaks for the poor? Who speaks for the workers? Who is standing up for the disadvantaged here?

Michael Hudson: Mainly their employers and creditors claim to be speaking for the workers. Their trickle-down economics says that “What’s good for us is good for the workers. We want to help the workers by lending them more money to afford nicer housing, and lend them enough money to afford to pay their rising debt charges.”

Jim Vrettos: Yet in fact that’s not in their interest.

Michael Hudson: Of course it’s not. But they can dominate media and drown out alternatives. The media don’t care very much what Reverend Barber says or what Bernie says. The media say, “What’s good for the workers is what’s good for the banks.” In fact, Trump and Biden came up last week and said there’s going to have to be a second coronavirus bill, and we’ve got to really focus this time on the banks. We didn’t give them enough in the first bill, o we have to give them more so that they can lend more.

Now, when you say we have to give the banks more money to lend more to get the economy moving, it means we have to have families and businesses take on more debt. This means that more and more of their income must be paid as interest and amortization, financial fees, late fees and penalties, and service charges. The double-talk is about as explicit as can be, with the Democrats being more adept at euphemism than the Republicans.

Jim Vrettos: As you probably know, we’re taping this same day that Bernie has dropped out of the campaign. So who do you look to? What movement, what organizations are left to represent the interests of the vast majority of us?

Michael Hudson: I don’t see anyone. Certainly in my profession, the economics profession, the major respectable economic journals are all censored by the Chicago School of monetarists and the neoliberals. So it’s very hard to look to the economics profession for much help, at least from professors who want to get promoted and get tenure. I don’t see much help at all.

As for voters and the two political parties, if you look at what economists call “revealed preference” and who the main voters for Biden are, what are they supporting? They threw the election to Biden, away from Bernie. What did they want? Well, it’s as if they want lower wages, less education, more debt and more police power. They want more credit (that is, debt) and they would like to see social programs scaled back. That’s what the voters have selected, “because it can beat Trump.” That’s their revealed preference, if you look at what their voting reflects. It’s as if they’ve chosen lower living standards, and believe that the rich should have enough more money so that maybe some of it will trickle down.

MMT, left- and right-wing

Jim Vrettos: Trickle down. Right. You also work with Modern Monetary Theorists, correct?

ORDER IT NOW

Michael Hudson: That’s right. I’m on leave from the University of Missouri at Kansas City, which has been the center of that. I’m also, as you pointed out, a research fellow at the Levy Institute, and I’ve worked closely with Stephanie Kelton, Randy Wray and the others.

Jim Vrettos: So tell us a little about that approach that you still have some confidence in. Tell us about what they are telling us to do, what you’re telling us to do as a group.

Michael Hudson: It’s not a homogeneous school. The idea of Modern Monetary Theory has roots going back to the functional finance of Abba Lerner in the 1960s, but you can look at Hyman Minsky as one who really inspired it in the 19980s and ‘90s. Its logic is that deficit spending is not bad if it is spent in the real economy to increase employment and spending.

The Chicago School says any government spending is the road to the gas chambers. I’ve heard that said literally. They say that with government spending, you’re going to end up like Germany in the Weimar area with hyperinflation or like Zimbabwe. They think that running a government deficit actually increases consumer prices and that erodes the purchasing power of financial wealth. Well, Modern Monetary Theory says, first of all, that there’s a disconnect between financial asset prices and where the real economy is going. Asset prices, capital gains and the wealth of the 1% are going up but real wages and disposable income has been going down. We’ve seen real estate, stocks and bond prices going up and up since the Obama bailout of 2009, but the economy has not benefited the 95 percent.

There’s a sort of crude MMT solution, to simply run a budget deficit. And one extreme, there are some MMTers – not me and not my colleagues, but some MMTers – who say that all you have to do is run a budget deficit and you’ll pump money into the economy. The tacit assumption is that this money is going to be spent in a Keynesian-style way, on hiring labor, especially if the government will build infrastructure. The government would buy goods and services, whose production involves paying labor and you’ll reflate the economy, you’ll increase the circular flow of income within the production and consumption sector.

On the other hand, Wall Street and England have discovered bad MMT. It’s Donald Trump’s or the Democratic Party’s Obama-style MMT version known as Quantitative Easing. This approach says that deficits are indeed wonderful, as long as the government is running a deficit to spend on Wall Street, not into the “real” economy.

The leading MMT advocates of government spending, like Stephanie Kelton, Randy Wray and a whole group of MMTers who are critics of Wall Street, emphasize just what kind of government deficit spending we’re talking about. What actually is spent on public investment, employment and income support. It has to be spent on labor and tangible capital. The fake MMTers are saying government deficits are great if given to the banks. Banks will provide the credit and save the rest of the economy. But that’s the opposite of what we’re saying. So just like every good religion early on, every good idea from Jesus to Marxism can be turned upside down and into the opposite. You’re seeing an attempt today to turn the MMT that we all developed in the last three decades into a travesty of bailouts for Wall Street. It is as if bailing out Wall Street, Barack-Obama or Joe-Biden style, is going to bail out the economy by enabling it to run deeper into debt.

Bernie Sanders’ six-point program

Jim Vrettos: So that’s the choice we have then – the Trump version or the Obama-Biden version. I just got a group email from Bernie. Stephanie Kelton is one of his economic advisors. I’m going to read it briefly here. It’s about the six core provisions that must be included in the next legislation. The first need, he says, is to address the employment crisis and provide immediate financial relief. To do this, we must begin monthly payments of $2,000 for every man, woman and child in our country – guaranteed paid family relief throughout the crisis, so that people who are sick do not need to choose between infecting others or losing their job. Is that what you’re talking about?

Michael Hudson: This is similar to the MMT proposal for guaranteed income. What Bernie says is that the best way to introduce this proposal is to begin it during the coronavirus when people most obviously need it. I think Bernie added that it should be given to self-employed, to retirees, and to aliens living here. You have also to give it to everybody, or else they are going to be out in the street. It has to be general. I think a number of our people have been recommending that over the years. Pavlina Tcherneva usually explains this program as an extension of MMT policy.

Jim Vrettos: Absolutely. The second point he makes, along with what you’ve just said, is that we must guarantee healthcare to all. Medicare must be empowered to pay all of the deductibles, co-payments and out-of-pocket healthcare expenses for the insured, uninsured and under-insured. No one in America who is sick, regardless of immigration status, should be afraid to seek the medical treatment they need.

ORDER IT NOW

Michael Hudson: Here is the perfect catalyst opportunity for general healthcare for all. The reason you have to give healthcare for everybody right now, without cost, is that if you don’t, they’re going to be sick. And without health care, they’re going to spread the disease to the rest of the economy. My friends in Hong Kong are telling me that there has been a second wave of virus there, and I’m told that in China there’s a second wave. If you don’t give the healthcare to everybody who needs it and you don’t begin testing everybody and giving them whatever they need to get well. That includes guaranteeing their housing, as you just talked about, enough to pay their rent, buy food and get by when they’re not earning an income. The alternative is for them to infect the whole rest of society repeatedly. Here’s a perfect scale of model and a dress rehearsal for Medicare For All.

Jim Vrettos: Third point, to use the defense production act to produce the equipment and testing we need.

Michael Hudson: That’s nice thought in principle, but the problem is that America has spent three decades since the 1980s disinvesting and outsourcing its industrial sector. I’m told that there are no screws or fasteners made here. How are you going to produce the medical equipment, masks and other things you need?

Masks, I’m told, cost about 20 cents to make. But here in New York they’re being sold for $10. I think that the plan to produce them in America is to give U.S. monopolies the power of life over death, your money or your life. Why not $50 a mask – and let buyers pay on credit. Send them a new box of masks each week and sign them up on an easy-payment plan, billed every month like a public utility.

If it costs ten or even a hundred times as much to produce protection in America because they’re producing for profit, do you really want to leave this to private industry? You really want the health sector to be public, because if it’s privatized, it’s going to be run with the objective of charging monopoly rent and lowering the quality. Basically it will be rife with the kind of fraud that we’ve seen whenever there is a kind of crisis.

I think that Bernie wanted to say that we should revive manufacturing in this country, but this is not something that can be done quick enough to cope with the coronavirus. The government has been grabbing sales of masks and other equipment to European countries and giving them to the Republican States. I think FEMA grabbed masks and ventilators for Massachusetts, a Democratic state. We’re going to give it to Western states that vote Republican. The system already is so deeply corrupted that I don’t see a short term solution.

Jim Vrettos: Fourth point: Make sure that no one goes hungry. As states record levels of food insecurity, we must increase benefits, expand the WIC program, double the funding for emergency food programs, expand Meals on Wheels, school meals programs, and deliver food to vulnerable populations. So it sounds like an extension of Great Society anti-poverty programs.

Michael Hudson: Again, who will benefit financially from this? Will this be a public program or a privatized program? I’m sure Donald Trump and Wall Street would like to charge the government $20 for every lunch that cost them $2. So at what price and on what terms? Who’s going to be the main beneficiary? If Bernie is a good sport and let’s Biden decide, he’s a goner.

Jim Vrettos: Exactly. Two more: Provide emergency aid to states and cities, $600 billion direct physical aid to ensure that they have the personnel and funding necessary to cope with the crisis. In addition, they must establish programs to provide fiscal support and budgetary relief to States and municipalities.

Michael Hudson: That could be an awful program if it is debt-financed. States and municipalities are so deeply in debt that this crisis is going to push them even deeper. What Bernie seems to be opening himself up to is the Mitch McConnell solution: “Let’s abolish the public pensions that they owe, and let’s cut back public services. We have to let the banks be paid. Let the Federal Reserve load down the states even more in debt and make sure that they pay their bondholders who are mainly in the wealthiest 5% of the population.” This could be a bailout for the 5%. The State and local debt must be written off. It’s become a bad debt in the fact of the corona virus.

Unfortunately, American law has no procedure for state and local bankruptcy. They can’t wipe out their debt. Even worse, many states have written into their constitution a balanced-budget requirement. If the Federal Reserve gives them support by more credit that has to be repaid, they’re going to have to cut back social services. Betsy de Vos would like them to sell off the schools to be privatized. In any case, they’re going to have to change the character of local spending. You cannot save the states and localities after this crisis if the current debt and financial overhead remains on the books. There has to be federal funding in one form or another acknowledging that the crisis has prevented the states, New York state, New York City and others from paying their debts. So we need to write them down.

That is going to cost bondholders. They belong to the higher income brackets, because state and local bonds are tax-exempt. Somebody has to bear the costs, and the Republican and Democratic suggestion is the same: to make the 99% pay the the 1%. That is a terrible solution. It doesn’t address the debt problem. Without addressing that, you are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Jim Vrettos: He may be trying to redeem himself a bit here with the six recommendation. Suspend monthly payments. We must suspend monthly expenses like rent, mortgages, medical debt and consumer debt collection for four months. We must cancel all student loan payments for the duration of this crisis, place an immediate moratorium on evictions, foreclosures and utility shut-offs. It doesn’t go far enough. Correct?

ORDER IT NOW

Michael Hudson: What does “suspending” mean? Does it mean not having to pay rent this month, next month and maybe in August and September? That’s fine. But what happens when October comes? If your rent is $1500 a month, do you have to pay the $7500 that has mounted up in arrears – or be kicked out? The landlord or mortgage banker will have a lien on whatever you’re supposed to get from Social Security and other income. They will get a lien on your property and wages. So suspending payments isn’t enough. They have to be annulled.

The bailout has given an enormous giveaway to the real estate industry, and is backing its right to collect all the rents, or else to evict the tenants and grab their property and paychecks. This is a pro-landlord bill. What’s needed is nonpayment. You have to follow the money and come right out and say what the underlying problem is.

Jim Vrettos: Understood. The political resistance to what’s going down is so feeble. Certainly during the sixties we had a welfare rights movement that Richard Cloward and Frances Piven helped organize to put pressure from the bottom up and get some sort of guaranteed annual income.

Michael Hudson: For the bottom up, but led by the top down.

Jim Vrettos: Yeah.

Michael Hudson: They were not very effective. There was an egotism saying “We’re for the people.”

Jim Vrettos: I’m searching for some of your ideas as to what we might support as alternatives. Do you see any out there, and how people can mobilize to resist and organize?

Michael Hudson: I think Reverend Barber is doing good work. I think the Justice Democrats are doing good work. I think the people around AOC also are.

Jim Vrettos: BrandNew Congress we heard are doing some good work.

Michael Hudson: But that’s not enough. There’s still not much discussion of the economic problem that really is at the root of this. People complain about the symptoms of inequality, even rich people do that. Everybody has books documenting inequality. But what they don’t want is a discussion of what’s creating it. Does the world have to be this way? What policies are needed to reverse it?

If you discuss that, and find that the root of inequality is the financial system indebting the economy and financializing real estate instead of making it the tax base, then you realize that you have to change the system. Today’s wealth is mainly financial and rent-extracting, taking the form of indebtedness for 90% of the population.

The only way to recover is to wipe out this debt. You can’t recover the real economy of production and consumption without wiping out the debt overhead, without rolling it back. That is what people are unwilling to see. They’re unwilling to look at the solutions, because that’s beyond the Overton window. It’s cognitive dissonance. Actually curing the problem is no simply rubbing your hands and saying, “Oh, isn’t that too bad?” If you criticize the debt system, however, you lose the coverage and the public media. That is why we’re on the Internet, not on The New York Times or Wall Street Journal.

Jim Vrettos: Exactly. And you’re one of the very few economists who have looked into the philosophical and historical origins of this.

Dismissing debt problems as an “externality” instead of at the core of policy solutions

Michael Hudson: I became an anthropologist and archeologist a Research Fellow in Babylonian economics at Harvard’s Peabody Museum in 1984, to focus on that. It was obvious that the debts were not going to be rolled back. In 1980 the U.S. economy was so highly indebted that when interest rates went up to 20%, many economists thought that the debts would be wiped out in a convulsion of bankruptcy as in the 1930s. Instead, you had the government play a new role, to support Wall Street and to deregulate the economy for financial predators. The result was the Drexel Burnham era of corporate rating, and financial takeovers and debt pyramiding that has caused today’s problem.

If the problem is financialization, then the solution to the economy has to be to de-financialize. That cannot be done as a slow process. It can only be done in a single stroke, a quantum leap. I don’t see a constituency for wiping out the debt as long as people believe that you have to help the banks save the economy and help the 1% trickle down their wealth.

The 1% has no intention of letting its wealth trickle down. Its intention is to take even more wealth from the 99%. Its intention is to suck up, not trickle down. Its lobbyists write the laws to make sure that the wealth is sucked up, not trickled down. And unless you realize that there’s a war of the financial sector against the rest of the economy, then as Warren Buffet said, “There’s a war on, and we’re winning it.” But only they know there’s a war. The victims don’t even know there’s a war.

Jim Vrettos: The victims become statistics that we’re willing to put up with. One of the questions I have for you here: Each year, over 250,000 people die in the United States in what social scientists refer to as structural violence and economic devastation of living in poverty, with the strains, stresses and anxiety of trying to survive in the structure of work, family, criminal justice, health and housing. We’re willing to put up with that, we’re willing to blame the victim in a sense, and create a whole structure that attempts to address their problems without dealing with the structural roots.

Michael Hudson: Economists call these problems externalities. In other words, they’re external to the economic model. Just as global warming and pollution are external to the model. This is at the root of “free market” theory rationalizing the status quo as natural, as if There Is No Alternative. The problems and costs to society created by financialization and living in the short run are considered external to the model, because the models themselves are short-term. and really focus on how the 1% can make more money. How can the financial sector make more money from the real economy? Debt and credit is see as the solution, not as the problem.

ORDER IT NOW

Environmental pollution, personal violence, the suicide rate, emigration and shortening lifespan, that’s all external because once you discuss them, then all of a sudden you broaden the problem beyond what economists talk about to what society talks about. In all of the academic disciplines this is occurring. Sociology was developed in an attempt to broaden economics to discuss these overall social issues. Just as the University of Chicago played a narrowing censorial role in economics, it played a similar role in sociology, just talking about status as if it is something inherent. Anthropology was created as a discipline in order look at the long picture. But that’s been narrowed into what one anthropologist calls underwater basket weaving and a study of tribal groups.

There is no academic discipline that is focusing the debt problem that we’re discussing. Any “discipline” is narrow. You need a pan-disciplinary approach – a broad approach that looks at society as an overall economic system, not as separating one economic organ from suicide rates or public health, as if none have any relationship with each other. It’s a desegregated system. There’s nothing like the kind of discussion you had in ancient Greece, Rome or Babylonia in ancient times when people treated the social problems as including personal character, the environment and everything else.

Jim Vrettos: Understood. Barber does talk about this to a certain extent by trying to make connections to racism, ecological devastation, war and militarism, the false moral narratives that hold up these injustices. Is that the sort of analysis we need, the thinking that we need to pursue?

Michael Hudson: Who’s going to provide that kind of narrative in an academic framework, given the way that the universities segregate their educational system into disciplines? Can you provide it in the media? Is this something that you’d expect to get discussed in now The New York Times or the Wall Street Journal? Is it something you’d expect to discuss on ABC TV, MSNBC or Fox news? Where are you going to discuss this?

Jim Vrettos: I understand what you’re saying. We’re all in our little silos here, so-called disciplines that are not interconnected. We don’t see that in the political world, in the academic world, as you say, in the so-called spiritual, religious world as well. You’ve written about how religion and economics have been so separated and how that needs to be re-connected. Do you want to spend a little bit of time on that?

Michael Hudson: Every religion has gone downhill, just like classical economics, which turned into the opposite of what it was in the time of Adam Smith and John Stuart Mill. When I talk about religion’s treatment of debt, I begin with Sumer and Babylonia and the idea of religion as preserving economic stability. It wasn’t so much out of an idea of utopian idealism that the Mesopotamian rulers canceled debts. They wanted to prevent the economy from falling apart. They wanted to prevent the citizenry – the taxpayers and cultivators on the land – from falling into debt to an oligarchy that would use their money to overthrow the rulers and take over society, financial-style.

Religion tends to reflect the leadership of society, although it tends to begin as a moral reform movement. The leadership in the third millennium, second millennium and even the first millennium BC could not afford an oligarchy impoverishing the rest of society. If an oligarchy did that, society would fall apart. But gradually as Aristotle pointed out, every democracy turns into an oligarchy, and so do palace economies. The oligarchy in turn tends to our takeover religion. In Judaism, Jesus accused the Pharisees of loving money and replacing the Jubilee year with Rabbi Hillel’s prosbul in which debtors waived their rights to have a debt cancellation under the Jubilee Year.

Same thing with Christianity. It began with the idea, expressed in Jesus’s first sermon when he said that he had come to proclaim the Jubilee Year. He unrolled the scroll of Isaiah and said, that was his message. Christianity began that way. But by the fifth century of our era, it took the African branch of Cyril of Alexandria and St. Augustine, that said, “Okay, we’re going to accept the world as it is. It’s okay for the landlords to have their land and for the rich people to be rich, but we will just ask them to be moral and act with charity, especially to us paradigmatic poor in the Church.”

You have every religion taken over, so you need a continual renovation, a continual Renaissance of religion. It usually is easier to start a new religion – or a new academic discipline – than trying to reform an institution mired in inertia. I don’t think existing religions can be reformed, any more than the economics discipline that has deteriorated into a religion of financial wealth-seeking.

I don’t know what’s happening with the Catholic church. It has a Pope who seems to want to restore the Liberation Theology that the Church was moving toward in the late 20th century. I don’t know what the future of that is. Obviously there was a fight by the last two Popes to oppose Liberation theology. The Protestant religions I think are pretty passive.

Jim Vrettos: Sounds like we’re in the iron cage as the sociologist Max Weber put it.

Michael Hudson: I thought you were going to say the End Days.

Jim Vrettos: Well, I don’t think he put it that way, but-

Michael Hudson: I meant the Book of Revelation.

Jim Vrettos: Right. Marx saw a little hope in the idea of praxis, correct?

Will Finance Capitalism destroy Industrial Capitalism?

Michael Hudson: He thought that industrial capitalism was going to be revolutionary in fulfilling its historical destiny of lowering the cost of production, above all by lowering costs and being more efficient by getting rid of the landlord class and the financial class. He expected credit to be made a public socialist infrastructure. His idea was that industrial capitalism would find an increasing role of socialism to be in its self-interest. In his day you saw what was called state socialism in Prussia and the rest of Germany. Marx was careful to point out that state socialism wasn’t really socialism. But it was paving the way for a working-class democracy or revolution to take over.

ORDER IT NOW

In Marx’s day the fight for democracy was led by industrial capitalism. The only way to get rid of the landlord class and its predatory extraction of rent was to replace the veto power of the House of Lords over Parliament with a publicly elected House of Commons having primary legislative authority. The followers of Ricardo, the “Ricardian socialists” and John Stuart Mill backed parliamentary reform to extend voting power to the people. Marx assumed that it would be logical for industrial capitalists to act in their self-interest, and voters to act in theirs. But it hasn’t worked out that way.

It seemed to be working that way, leading up to World War I. But that war I came like a meteor, knocking the West’s economic development path out of orbit. The rentier class, the landlords and predatory banking class, made a resurgence. Instead of the government reflecting the interests of industry and the people in the form of rising wages to produce a rising circular flow and demand for industrial products, a positive feedback between industrial production and labor, you had the financial rentier sector – what I call the FIRE sector, Finance, Insurance and Real Estate – hijack the economy and bring about the permanent depression that we’re in now.

This is my main point: We are in a permanent depression. There can be no recovery without wiping out the debt overhead (euphemized as “wealth”). As long as you leave the 1% with the lion’s share of wealth (creditor claims) and property ownership, the economy cannot recover. Without realizing that, there cannot be a class consciousness regarding today’s world.

Marx talked about the class consciousness of labor vis-a-vis its employers. That took place within the production and consumption sector. But today’s class consciousness of wage earners has to see that industrial companies have been turned into financial companies. They’ve been financialized. A relevant class consciousness must realize that it’s up to socialists to do what industrial capitalism failed to do – namely, to free society from the rentier sector, from the landlord class, the monopolists and financial creditor class. Without freeing society from them, you’re going to have a neofeudal economy. As Rosa Luxemburg said, it’s either socialism or barbarism. Barbarism is a permanent depression. All the classical economists warned against the landlord class, banks and the monopolists continuing to run society into the ground.

Jim Vrettos: The state has become a functionary of the financial sector. It hasn’t withered away in the sense as Marx would have thought.

Michael Hudson: It has not evolved in the way he anticipated. Marx thought that at least the state might be for state capitalism. He worried it would go hand in hand with heavy industry and squeeze labor. The question was, would a state capitalism see its interest in supporting labor’s living standards or not? But as it turns out, the financial sector is much more brutal than the industrial sector that Marx envisioned as evolving toward socialism. Finance conquers the entire economy, industry along with labor

Jim Vrettos: We’re about out of time, but I have to ask, are there any examples that you can maybe point to – Denmark, Finland or anything that we can point to as a model that might be something we could emulate to a certain extent?

Michael Hudson: Certainly a social democracy helps, and Denmark and Finland never let themselves be financialized in the first place. They never let the 1% grab the control of the economy to the extent that has occurred in the United States and much of Europe. So the problem is, how do you get rid of a parasitic blister on society? That can only be done by cutting off the blister. Denmark and Finland have not had to deal with this problem, because they’ve remained more balanced.

What do you do when society has lost its balance? You have to think about structural reform. That’s radical by definition. Structural reform is called an externality – exogenous, extraneous to what economists talk about. If you’re talking about where the economy should go, mainstream economists are talking in a narrow policy tunnel that means “Be passive and do nothing, be quiet like a frog boiling in water.”

Jim Vrettos: A frog boiling in water. Well, Michael, thank you very much. It’s been most enlightening. Thank you so much for doing the show.

(Republished from The Radical Imaginations by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 100 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Sean says:

    I don’t know is it is because he is putting it in layman’s terms more or i have read the previous articles ant it is starting to permeate but the last few post have been very convincing and even more thought provoking than usual. However, it is a tactical error to advocate for aliens to get free healthcare and guaranteed income too. It is not obvious to the indigenous population that that do not have special entitlement in their own country.

  2. Hudson is long on structural analysis and short on practical advice.

    He’s been preaching the need for the modern Jubilee Year but silent on how to get it done.

    How do we write off the debt? Specifics, please.

  3. @Jedi Night

    He’s written entire books on it. Read them.

    Nevertheless, the answer is simple. Just write it off. If you mean “Politically, how do we do it.” Then he has no idea and you have no idea and I don’t either. I suppose the only way is to actually popularize Jubilee so that the average person has a clue what it is. Get some rap guy to talk about Jubilee. Except that rap guys are deep-state agents. Curses foiled again.

    But anyhow, ignoring the political impossibility of it, hypothesizing a political plebiscite in favor of Jubilee, economically, how do we do it? By just doing it. Period.

    • Replies: @Druid
    , @exudd1
  4. bluedog says:
    @Jedi Night

    I suppose you write it off the same way billions were wrote off in the Dot.com crash,or a few trillion in the housing crash and bailing out the too big to fail, or buying up the toxic trash that the bankers held.!!

    • Replies: @exudd1
    , @paranoid goy
  5. Chris Moore says: • Website

    As our guest puts it, the recently passed Trump “Bank and Landlord Relief” bill, mistakenly named the Coronavirus bill, starts by providing banks with an even larger giveaway of wealth than they received from Obama in 2008. Helping the banks, financial and real estate sectors in a so-called free market system is conflated with helping the industrial economy and general living standards for most Americans. The essence of a parasite is not only to drain the host’s nourishment, but to dull the host’s brain so that it does not recognize that the parasite is there.

    One of the ways it does this is to entice most of the biggest companies onto the stock markets, which in turn subordinates them to the financial sector — more specifically, the investment bankers. And then the nations CEO’s become sort of one big club, and the top of the club is the head parasites pulling the strings on the stock market (outfits like Goldman Sachs).

    NO ONE wants to cross the head parasites, the corrupt political class turns to them as their economic brain trust, and the propaganda class (MSM) spin narratives that comport to the corrupt political class’ interests and the corrupt status quo.

    This is why liberalism and neoconservatism are the two sides of the one political coin that Americans are allowed to choose. Lean left? You’ll get a liberal who mostly uses identity politics to divide and rule. Lean right? You’ll get a neocon who mostly uses foreign affairs to divide and rule. But increasingly, the two cross-over, hence you’ll see liberals harping 24/7 about Russiagate and neocons harping 24/7 about Iran, Islam and now China.

    None of this is to say that Russia, China and Iran aren’t competitors, because they are. But the liberal and neocon fanatics turn them into existential, kill or be killed competitors. And this is because they’ve internalized the Holocaust and 9/11 as their moral compass.

    So the myths of the Holocaust and 9/11 that they’ve pretended to believe or been brainwashed into believing are the “us or them” lens through which they see the rest of the world, and through which they will continue to see the world until they get the de-programming they so desperately need.

    These two Big Lies and their attendant wars have driven them to the brink of insanity, and are driving the rest of the country to ruin.

    • Replies: @GeeBee
    , @paranoid goy
  6. Again, I fine Hudson’s doom and gloom conspiracy theory that the biggies are deliberately grabbing everything to be specious. You would think that Hudson’s study of ancient history would clue him in to the reality that if the villains of his conspiracy theory succeed the entire society will implode. In other words, can a few greedy pigs monopolize everything? Maybe. Can that kind of a system exist for more than a few months, maybe a year? Not a chance.

    Hudson’s inability to see beyond his incessant explaining over and over and over and over again the same thing over and over and over again is tiring and depressing. I sincerely don’t know what Hudson’s point is. That everything is shit? That we should all just kill ourselves?

    I mean really. What is the point of this same old tale by Michael Hudson. I used to think he was trying to be a beacon or something. Warning us. But he never ever suggests anything that can or should be done. Perhaps it is his Marxist roots from his dad and his early upbringing. He just goes over and over and over again on how terrible it all is.

    He is a hand wringer. His approach invites paralyzed stagnation, not change. Michael, it is time for you to talk action. What must be done? Speak to that with 100 percent of your time on camera.

    Thanks.

  7. @Jedi Night

    A very important article. Huge thanks, Michael Hudson.

    At the top of my mind just now (yes, I have one — I think I have) are two current RT articles, one about how Cuba is helping the world with cov19 and how the USA is trying to prevent that help from being delivered, Covid-19: Cuba’s people-before-profit approach pays off as capitalism proves a bitter pill for the US https://on.rt.com/afuu and the other on the plight of the USA, that bitter pill, ONE IN SEVEN Americans would avoid Covid-19 treatment for fear of cost, even as pricey new pill shows promise against virus https://on.rt.com/ag4h with a photo of a near corpse on a stretcher at the top with the caption This person doesn’t know it yet, but they’re about to be charged thousands of dollars.

    The first is about the success of Communism and the second’s about the success of Capitalism.

    Michael Hudson, I presume you’ve been to Cuba and studied their system. It would be great if you could write an article on it.

  8. @Jedi Night

    Oops. I didn’t mean to reply to you, Jedi Night, but now I do.

    Easy. The USG has already paid the banks enough to have bought up all their assets and nationalized them. Let it put its own civil service adminstrators in charge of each and they just adjust the books, writing off the debts of all debtors. Then they start affresh, new genuine borrowings, new genuine debts.

    What’s difficult about that?

  9. anon[608] • Disclaimer says:
    @restless94110

    everyone know what we need to do ,pointing at the problem is enought

  10. TG says:

    Very intelligent commentary, kudos, but one major flaw.

    Money and debt are indeed extremely powerful: but still, not as powerful as the real world.

    You talk blithely about giving benefits to illegal immigrants from the overpopulated third world: that would wipe out everything and make all financial reforms moot.

    Even in the best of circumstances, with a non-parasitic financial system, an economy is still just flesh and blood human beings slowly and patiently putting one brick on top of another. It’s not a magic trick. When people all try to have seven kids each starting at age 14, then at least without an open frontier, there is no recorded instance of any such society ever getting ahead of the game. Ignoring the effects of demographics will void all other interventions.

    FIRST intended fertility rates fall, THEN, if everything else goes half-way right, living standards can rise.

    Why do you think that, more than anything else, the rich have always pushed for ever more population growth and ever cheaper labor? You really think the rich want to force populations higher because they are compassionate? Hah!

  11. I like Michael Hudson, but he gives far too much credit to Marx. Marx was not shy about stealing the ideas of his predecessors and contemporaries. “His” economic observations were standard fare at the time. His success was promoting communism, which did have proponents, as socialism. Most of his contemporaries rejected his views, one calling him “the tapeworm in socialism”. This link is a decent overview of socialism: https://slife.org/socialism/

    As for Bernie and his platform, I have never met, or heard of, a real socialist of any kind be in favour of open borders, much less giving them what citizens have. Socialists understand immigration is the reserve army of capital used to attack wages and working conditions. The mantra of universal basic income is really a version of Clifford Douglas’ Social Credit, which preached that interest was the problem, because it was the law of diminishing returns. Therefore, credit had to be returned to the consumers to consume goods and services. The NSDAP Labour Certificates of the 1930s and Lincoln’s “Greenbacks” were also a form of this.

    There is an offhand comment about “trickle down”. It should be noted that both Paul Craig Roberts and the late Jude Wanniski were proponents of trickle down economics, and both claimed that despite the hype, it never happened under Reagan.

  12. I was reading through some of E. Michael Jones writings and he frames economics as labor vs usury, which is very similar to Michael Hudsons industrial capitalism vs finance capitalism. E. Michael Jones thinks that “capitalism” is really just the Jewish system of usury and its antithesis is Catholicism, because to him that is the only thing that can keep Jewish rapacity in check. He doesn’t understand that the counterpoint of finance capitalism and Jewish debt rape is not catholicism. It’s industrial capitalism; going back to basics and producing real goods and services with as few financial parasites as possible.

    It’s funny but as a non-economist E. Michael Jones does get pretty close to the mark, but Michael Hudson is closer.

  13. KA says:
    @Jedi Night

    What is preventing you from finding an answer to your own question is the same barrier that would have prevented you from rescuing the banks,corporations,luxury hotels, cruises,real estate class if you were in charge at the Fed. All of us have some in built resistance to embarking on gigantic illegal activity . But the resistance is not made of steel but of smog – easy to go through once the moral barrier is penetrated and is easy for other to repeat the dishonest feat who watches it from close quarters ( that’s why these psycho socialize and mingle in same circle ) .

    The difference between jubilee cancellation and our corporation rescue is that the former touches the lives of the 90% and doesn’t hurt drastically the rest . There are other differences . We are cancelling the burden on those who support themselves and also the managerial parasitic renter class . The rentier parasitic managerial class is an outgrowth and to some extent essential feature of the manufacturing and labor based economy . Unfortunately instead of treating them as debris and waste of the industrial activity, we have embroidered them with ornate words and spectacle of brilliance .

    By ignoring them we have created a monster . If we treated the function,relevance and place of interest with clear thinking and didn’t discard it as sin ,we would have been able to avoid the interest based renter class from all section of economy . I think it is the bootlegging following the prohibition. You can’t prevent people from drinking by that sort of measure .

    First billion is most difficult .
    First murder is most challenging .

    First bailout of the bank is most difficult to argue .
    Once done, it’s as simple as panhandling for a penny at the street corner .

  14. GeeBee says:
    @Chris Moore

    Your post is excellent, but it contains one very important ommission. When you write that ‘they’ve internalized the Holocaust and 9/11 as their moral compass’ you don’t actually identify who ‘they’ are. Triple brackets around ‘they’ would have sufficed.

    • Replies: @Chris Moore
  15. GeeBee says:
    @restless94110

    He points to the problem, but he – understandably – dare not name the culprits. ‘Touching the third rail’ would be career suicide. Why? Because as Voltaire famously never actually said, ‘to discover who rules over you, first find whom you are not allowed to criticise’.

    Hudson is an alarm bell in the night. It is up to us to act upon it as best we might.

  16. Chris Moore says: • Website
    @GeeBee

    When you write that ‘they’ve internalized the Holocaust and 9/11 as their moral compass’ you don’t actually identify who ‘they’ are. Triple brackets around ‘they’ would have sufficed.

    But it’s not just the Hebrew syndicates that have internalized the mythical “official narratives” (of what were, in reality, inside jobs) as holy writ; it’s the entire American and Western political establishment that pretends to believe or does believe these fake stories.

    In fact, how much of the world questions or publicly doubts the official narratives? Not much. And it’s really only in Islamic nations that official doubts are raised. And that’s because they’re in an existential struggle with the Zionists (who have hijacked the West) and with their brainwashed lackeys and useful idiots who believe their ZOG dogma.

    The ZOG/NWO war against the West has been a slow and insidious process taking centuries, whereas its current war against Islam has been a relative blitzkrieg. Consequently, Muslims have been forced to face the reality of what’s happening to them, whereas most Westerners still haven’t figured it out.

    It’s only thanks to the Internet and the failed war against Islam that the average Westerner is starting to figure it out, because ZOG has unleashed the Muslim refugees upon the West in a desperate effort to save its own skin, and because so many soldiers came back in body bags or permanently scarred.

    Ironic, isn’t it? All those “high IQ” Anglos and WASPs didn’t have the horse sense to see what has been staring them in the face the entire time. Too blinded by greed, ego, hubris, intellectual arrogance, and ZOG.

    In that sense, ZOG’s lost war against Islam is the best thing that ever happened to America and the West because we’ve finally gotten our own wake up call that we, too, are in an existential struggle with ZOG.

    • Agree: Druid
    • Replies: @GeeBee
  17. GeeBee says:
    @Chris Moore

    Fair enough (except that I can’t see how the holyhoax can have been ‘an inside job’; perhaps you meant solely 9/11). Anyhow, when you state that ‘Anglos and WASPs didn’t have the horse sense to see what has been staring them in the face the entire time. Too blinded by greed, ego, hubris, intellectual arrogance, and ZOG’ you are right, but you left out arguably the most potent and debilitating of all the elements that conspire to cause our present woes. Thus, I would have enumerated them rather differently, by saying that ‘greed, ego, hubris, intellectual arrogance, and ZOG acted as secondary infections (let’s keep it topical!) that exploited the weakened immune system of Western populations brought about by the spread of Protestant Christian axiology.

    (((The usual suspects))) were demonstrably behind the movements that, in the sixteenth- and seventeenth-centuries, were successful in ending the Roman Church’s hegemony and replacing it with a Protestant Christianity that placed the Old Testament (and thus Jews) at the forefront of the religion.

    It is at least arguable that Saul of Tarsus was a dissembling Jewish rogue, whose motive in devising the Chritian faith (for he, and not the Jesus figure, undoubtedly brought Christianity into being) was one of weaponising the gentiles in the service of Jews who wished for the overthrow of the hated Kittim ( as they called the Roman Imperium). This worked only too well, but by the early Middle-Ages the goyim had, maddeningly for the Jews, reclaimed their religion, by placing the toxic and destructive green kryptonite of the ideology of the New Testament safely into the lead-lined chamber that was the Roman Church.

    Naturally, the Jews didn’t like this at all, and although it took them a thousand years, they finally found a way of dragging the green kryptonite back out of the lead-lined Roman Church and out into the open, where of course, with its crazy notions that ‘the last shall be first’ and ‘the meek shall inherit the earth’, together with its exhortations to ‘love thy enemy’, to ‘take no thought for the morrow’, to essentially turn away from one’s familyu and to ‘turn the other cheek’ when struck. This recipe to gain control of an emasculated and brainwashed goyim with this dangerous, seditious monsense has worked all too well for them. Two sides of the same coin and all that…

    • Replies: @Curmudgeon
    , @Mefobills
  18. Thomasina says:

    We are living on a finite planet, people.

    I know, let’s solve it by having a debt jubilee. That’ll end the problems (sarc). That way people who bit off more than they could chew can go out and bite off more than they can chew again, smother themselves anew in more useless trinkets, rack up more debt, and consume until they drop, and all without learning a thing.

    And, no, I don’t think Wall Street and the hedge funds should have been bailed out either. Finance capitalism and globalization are destroying the planet, but we’re aiding and abetting them because we swallow their propaganda whole.

    I don’t much care for Michael Moore, but the new documentary “Planet of the Humans” is a really good watch for the “greenies” in the crowd. Excellent documentary.

    The last thing we need is more people and more growth.

    • Agree: Druid
  19. Chris Moore says: • Website

    I can’t see how the holyhoax can have been ‘an inside job’; perhaps you meant solely 9/11

    I meant in the propaganda sense. With the Holocaust propaganda, they took many decades to create the myth. With the 9/11 propaganda, they had the myth already set up and ready to go. In both cases, though, it was an inside job. Even the “Holocaust” was an inside job in the sense that Imperialist and Marxist Hebrews collaborated to create the conditions that led to Germany setting up internment camps for Jews, which the Hebrew grifters went on to exploit for the creation of Israel and Zionism, and to create the myth of the “Holocaust.”

    As far as Judaism and Christianity goes, I think what needs to be emphasized is what Moses ultimately did to incorrigible Hebrew parasites, grifters, criminals and money-grubbers, which is cleanse them with the sword. Christianity overtook the Roman Empire as females got more of a pillow talk voice in how the empire would be run (think of Pilate’s wife). Protestantism was founded by “anti-Semite” Martin Luther, probably because the Catholic Church had been corrupted by Hebrew parasites and their money-hungry whores and gigolos.

    All of that history has been re-written by Hebrew grifters and those in bed with them, or sent down the memory hole.

  20. nsa says:

    “…we must begin monthly payments of $2000 for every man, woman, and child in our country….”
    Better think this one out. 350 million Americans times $2000/month = 700 billion per month i.e. 8.4 trillion dollars per year. The federal government only takes in $3.7 trillion a year. This really is nuts. Further, who is going to work at Walmart or Home Depot for $10/hour, getting only 30 hours a week (to avoid paying bennies) i.e. $1260 a month before taxes? Why show up at Home Depot to mix paint for $1100/month after taxes when you can get $2000/month for sitting home smoking dope, watching sports or soaps or porn, and knocking down Ice House 16 ouncers? A single welfare mommy with three kids could collect $8000/month i.e. $96,000/year……we be movin’ on up. Hell, move granny in and make it an even $10,000 a month. There is little enough productive effort in the US already without this kind of insane disincentive.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Endeavor
  21. gotmituns says:

    Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Are Destroying Us
    ——————————————————————–
    Yep, that’s what the Jews are about.

  22. Druid says:
    @obwandiyag

    BS. You’re full of it as usual

  23. Emily says:

    The first thing which must be done – or forget the lot – is to stop mass immigration.
    Stop the invasion of western and first world countries by the third world.
    They are sucking the life blood out of the economies of the west.
    Reducing the ordinary folk within them to the cesspit and debt of a permanent underclass and poverty.
    Reducing the power of ‘labour’ to get its fair share of a nation ‘s wealth.
    The next thing is to stop the uncontrolled breeding creating this mass invasion force.
    We need mass contraception for the ‘third’ world.
    Not nano chips and faux vaccines for the ‘first’.

  24. USA : People Need FOOD, WE’RE STARVING!

    https://astutenews.com/2020/05/03/america-send-food-were-starving/

    [MORE]

    Queues up to six miles long have become common at these pop-up collection points
    as far afield as San Antonio, Las Vegas, and Cleveland, where thousands of recently
    furloughed and unemployed people wait hours for grocery boxes.”

    The scene is San Antonio, Texas. No, its not a gun show or football game, those
    6000 cars are waiting in line for free food. Yes, the cars look new, How can 35
    million people in a nation awash with cash, a nation with a massive and bloated
    military, a government that drops bails of cash to its terrorist and druglord allies
    around the world, how can that nation allow its people to starve?

    This stunningly detailed timeline of Trump’s failures shows America’s coronavirus
    crisis was a man-made disaster
    http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_87566.shtml

    ALSO…
    Dissident British ex-diplomat Craig Murray indicted for blog posts in Kafkaesque case
    https://www.newcoldwar.org/dissident-british-ex-diplomat-craig-murray-indicted-
    for-blog-posts-in-kafkaesque-case/
    Craig Murray, a former UK diplomat turned anti-war activist, has been charged with
    contempt of court for writing blog posts. He faces a possible two years in jail, with
    no jury and no freedom of speech defense permitted.

    SouthFront’s YouTube channel is banned
    https://www.newcoldwar.org/southfronts-youtube-channel-is-banned/
    On April 30 South Front’s Facebook and YouTube channels have been deleted
    without any warnings or an opportunity to file an appeal.

    No, The US Isn’t Going To Dump India Over Its Atrocious Treatment Of Minorities
    http://oneworld.press/?module=articles&action=view&id=1443

    Blaming The Victim Is The West’s Latest Infowar Tactic Against China
    http://oneworld.press/?module=articles&action=view&id=1440

    Lancet Editor Praises China, Slams Western Mishandling of COVID-19 Outbreaks
    https://www.globalresearch.ca/lancet-editor-praises-china-slams-western-
    mishandling-covid-19-outbreaks/5711592

  25. eah says:

    Congressman warns national debt could reach $30 trillion by end of September — Listen to John Solomon’s interview with the chairman of the House Freedom Caucus

    Biggs told Just the News that the trillions of dollars in coronavirus aid piled on the structural deficit for this fiscal year combined with the likelihood of even more spending in the coming months will bring the national debt to somewhere between $28 trillion to $30 trillion by the end of September.

    By “structural deficit” they mean entrenching the enslavement of Americans to service the national debt as a matter of official government policy.

  26. I had been a fan of Michael Hudson for well over a decade until I was eventually compelled to sadly and reluctantly realize that, like most of the other nominally hostile economists, he is in substance an apologist for the system. He is confronted with a system that is flagrantly criminal to the point of naked racketeering and then sets out to explain it within some academic framework as if it were merely very undesirable but otherwise legitimate.

    When you sign what you have been conditioned to call a mortgage, you are in fact underwriting-and-advancing-real-estate-secured-credit to the bank. The bank / banker strips off all of the assets and security as a premium for itself, and then reissues, returns, or reinsures unsecured credit back to you.

    You are then required to contribute another financial asset to the multi-party alleged transaction by way of a signed check payable to the vendor / seller of the property, and which the vendor / seller is then required to sign / endorse and return to the bank, at which point the bank / banker then merely agrees that the bank owes them the principal-amount / purchase-price.

    The banker arrives at the transaction with nothing, yet walks away with the legal title to the property from the vendor in one hand, and a promissory note and mortgage from the pretended borrower in the other, in exchange for his bare agreement that the bank owes the vendor the purchase-price / principal-amount.

    The banker commits fraud and effectively robs both of the other parties while making it appear that he is merely reallocating assets and liabilities between the other two parties.

    He puts the legal remedy out-of-reach to the seller / vendor by inducing them to sign-off on the fraudulent transaction by signing / endorsing the check.

    He puts the legal and equitable remedy out-of-reach to the pretended-borrower (from whom he obtains the secured-credit) by first inducing them to sign and swear under oath and penalty of perjury that the bank has already paid them, and that they have already received, the principal amount when in fact they have not. That converts the issuer’s conditional-promise-in-fact into a falsely-presented unconditional-promise which the bank then employs as a pre-funded financial instrument.

    As and when you sign the mortgage, your actual intent is to pay only if the bank pays you the principal amount, but that is a conditional promise to pay, and so the banker falsifies the mortgage to make it appear to be an unconditional promise to pay because the bank has already paid you the principal amount when in fact it has not. The whole system – including and especially these so-called economists – then pretend that it is some kind of chicken-and-the-egg problem instead of what it is – naked racketeering.

    The false-receipt and falsified-security is directly converted into the alleged loan funds – and that falsified-security is the only thing that the bank ever contributes to the pretended transaction.

    How else does any thinking man or woman account for the fact that banks all over the world own everything while producing nothing? This isn’t bleeping rocket science.

    It’s frustrating as Hell – but it isn’t rocket science.

    • Thanks: Usura
    • Replies: @Mefobills
  27. “…landlord class…”

    Hudson likes to use this term in a generic way, but one really needs to differentiate between, say, aristocratic land owners who inherited their wealth, billionaire property owners of primarily commercial real estate, urban slumlords who own multiple dwelling units, real estate investment trust market investors, and those individuals who sacrificed decades of consumption to pay off mortgages with interest, and paying taxes, in anticipation of being able to derive a modest future income stream from renting an apartment or flat, as a safety buffer for retirement, or a possible government collapse.

    Obviously, these different cases cannot all be lumped into one single rentier class and treated the same way. A fair solution to deal with inequity should handle these respective cases differently in the tax code. From a practical perspective, abrupt changes to regulations would likely be resisted, so new rules would have to be announced years prior to their adoption.

  28. exudd1 says:
    @bluedog

    Exactly! Well said! Thanks.

  29. exudd1 says:
    @obwandiyag

    Good advice!
    Very true. Point well taken.

  30. @Jedi Night

    Throw Congress, K Street, Wall Street, CFTC, FRB, SCOTUS, etal., into Boston Harbor?

  31. Agent76 says:

    Oct 11, 2017 Fascism’s Ties to Capitalism

    Dr. Michael Parenti interviewed by Dave Emory (1993)

    Business Plot – Smedley D. Butler

    Major General Smedley D. Butler describing a fascist plot to overthrow FDR. 28 December 1935, Universal Studios Newsreel

    Oct 22, 2019 Corporations Use “Money USA 20/20” Event To Expand Facial Recognition Worldwide

    Forget the Bilderburg Group meetings and how the world’s power elite meet in secret to help shape governments. Because Riseup’s, Money 20/20 events puts them to shame.

    https://massprivatei.blogspot.com/2019/10/corporations-use-money-usa-2020-event.html

  32. annamaria says:
    @restless94110

    Where to begin…
    https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/05/-the-moa-week-in-review-open-thread-2020-35/comments/page/2/#comments

    Dissident British ex-diplomat Craig Murray indicted for blog posts in Kafkaesque case https://www.newcoldwar.org/dissident-british-ex-diplomat-craig-murray-indicted-for-blog-posts-in-kafkaesque-case/
    Craig Murray, a former UK diplomat turned anti-war activist, has been charged with contempt of court for writing blog posts. He faces a possible two years in jail, with no jury and no freedom of speech defense permitted.

    SouthFront’s YouTube channel is banned: https://www.newcoldwar.org/southfronts-youtube-channel-is-banned/
    On April 30 South Front’s Facebook and YouTube channels have been deleted without any warnings or an opportunity to file an appeal.

    Julian Assange is in a high-security prison, punished for his fearless journalism. However, the criminal Ghislaine Maxwell and Lex Wexner are roaming free.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  33. Though not unschooled, had never heard nor seen either of the terms “finance capitalism” or “industrial capitalism” let alone the contrasting nearly diametrically opposed distinction between them until here at UR coming across this comment maker of unsurpassed insight MEFOBILLS:

    https://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Mefobills

    He calls industrial capitalism “the American System” implemented by Abe Lincoln at the urging of Henry Clay {shout out to Jack Givens ’74 who made Lexington Henry Clay nationally known} and names their contemporary economist or two who developed this macroeconomic strategy.

    MEFOBILLS emphasizes that finance capitalism is #JewUSURY, the source of all #JewPOWER (though he admits lying [John 8:44] is their genius for deception/subversion), and that Michael Hudson is an invaluable and brilliant writer on economics but does not #NAMEtheJEW so he can continue to get published which benefits we the innocent and truth-seeking goyim to the extent Hudson can.

    The unequivocal best path to self-edification on all of this is to simply read MEFOBILLS comments here, the best info available anywhere unless and until he himself writes a book on the topic.

    A quick glance at the article above reveals a guy with a background at a Jew institution interviewing the Politically Correct writer with Jew Marx being the first economic theorist mentioned.

    Methinks awaiting MEFOBILLS’ comments on all this is the more prudent course.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  34. Not shutting the economy down in the first place would have been very helpful.

  35. Usura says:

    A very interesting interview with Hudson, for which I’m grateful. I agree with much of his analysis, but have also found some points to criticize.

    Their trickle-down economics says that “What’s good for us is good for the workers. We want to help the workers by lending them more money to afford nicer housing, and lend them enough money to afford to pay their rising debt charges.”
    […]
    It’s as if they’ve chosen lower living standards, and believe that the rich should have enough more money so that maybe some of it will trickle down.
    […]
    trickle down their wealth.
    […]
    The 1% has no intention of letting its wealth trickle down. Its intention is to take even more wealth from the 99%. Its intention is to suck up, not trickle down. Its lobbyists write the laws to make sure that the wealth is sucked up, not trickled down.

    Whenever I hear someone denouncing “trickle-down economics”, my eyes glaze over. It’s one of those magic phrases that designed to get me to turn my brain off. Curtis Yarvin’s point, about it not being good strategy to use terms to describe your enemies which they themselves do not use, holds. Thomas Sowell provides all the rebuttal these “trickle-down” critics deserve.

    Certainly none of the innumerable fellow economists I have encountered in my 88 years ever advocated any such theory. Nor am I aware of anyone else, in any other walk of life, who has done so.

    The next time someone talks about the “trickle-down” theory, ask them to tell you where specifically you can find the writings, videos or any other evidence of someone advocating that theory. You may get some very clever and creative evasions of your question, but no actual answer.

    – Thomas Sowell “Fact Free Politics”, https://www.creators.com/read/thomas-sowell/01/19/fact-free-politics

    As Curmudgeon pointed out, although the trickle down theory is most popularly associated with the Reagan administration, the economists who attempted to implement so called Reaganomics called themselves Supply-Siders, and were never able to implement their policies. They were foiled by then vice president Bush I and his agents in Congress and the Office of Management and Budget, and left before the end of Reagan’s first term. “Trickle down” is pejorative weasel-words. .

    Hudson:

    If it costs ten or even a hundred times as much to produce protection in America because they’re producing for profit, do you really want to leave this to private industry? You really want the health sector to be public, because if it’s privatized, it’s going to be run with the objective of charging monopoly rent and lowering the quality. Basically it will be rife with the kind of fraud that we’ve seen whenever there is a kind of crisis.

    This is an incredible passage, as it shows how two people can look at the same facts with radically diverging interpretations. On one view, giving control over an industry to government (“public sector”) is granting such a monopoly. The idea that private industry is an acquiescence to monopolists, instead of an attempt to mitigate their harmful behaviour, is incredible. All man, whether employed in civil service or industry, seeks monopoly prices, but free markets put those seekers into competition in order to mitigate (but not eliminate) the risks from such pricing. The government is a de-facto monopolist with no incentive to improve products or lower prices, whereas those competing for the right to monopoly have an incentive to do both. If they ever achieve monopoly under such conditions, we can be reasonably assured that at least something tangible was done for customers in order for that state of affairs to come about; the government, by contrast, is not obliged to improve its products to maintain its monopoly, because it retains the legal right to imprison or kill those boycotting its services. As long as these conditions hold, the idea that fraud is endemic to the private sector is bunk.

    I’ve noticed many MMT/Chartalist advocates tend to have backgrounds in Wall Street finance, and many libertarians/Austrians/Anarcho-Capitalists tend to have backgrounds in civil service. Both seem to be fighting the corruption they see in their former employers. I can’t say who has the more accurate take, but suspect that their backgrounds are likely the source for this radical divergence of interpretation.

  36. tomo says:

    I think FB does not allow any more posts from UNZ
    I tried to post this earlier and it got rejected. The same thing happened yesterday

    • Replies: @Alfa158
  37. Agent76 says:

    May 3, 2020 Shutdowns: Pointless, Stupid and Evil

    No, I’m not going to be polite or gentle when so many good people are being tricked into cooperating with widespread, devastatingly destructive “solutions” to a problem that only ever threatened a tiny percentage of the population (which can be protected separately).

  38. @GeeBee

    Protestant Christianity that placed the Old Testament (and thus Jews) at the forefront of the religion.

    While there are some denominations that do that, the original protestants viewed the New Testament as the new covenant. The protests were against the non New Testament dogma of the RC Church, such as indulgences. The majority of Luther’s 95 theses were related to indulgences. The reality was that a large number of German Princes were opposed to the Holy Roman Empire (RC Church) monopoly on trade and saw the RC Church’s reaction to Luther as an economic opportunity. Luther was an Auntie Shem-ite. https://religionnews.com/2017/01/04/how-a-toy-figure-of-martin-luther-sparked-accusations-of-anti-semitism/

  39. Mefobills says:
    @GeeBee

    Nice reply and good summary.

    This recipe to gain control of an emasculated and brainwashed goyim with this dangerous, seditious monsense has worked all too well for them. Two sides of the same coin and all that…

    My tactic is to call it Judaizer Christianity. Our (((friends))) uphold the old testament, where the special people of god can gain a cloak of invisibility. Or, upheld as our betters, and hence deserving of their unearned income.

    Following the money: Luther’s writings were related to the indulgences, and that leads directly to the usual suspects. Calvanism was supported by our friends in Amsterdam. Ergo, Protestantism is prone to Judaizer sects. Catholicism has also rolled over with its “liberation theology” as Hudson mentions.

    I have noticed a return to basics with Orthodox, and in particularly the Moscow Patriarchy. There are some examples of Protestants becoming aware, such as Rick Wiles of Tru-News.

    Hudson’s argument can be distilled down to: people have bad narrative in their heads (including economists).. and today’s religion is not helping.

    Werner Sombart in his book “The Jews and Modern Capitalism” came to an important conclusion.”That which is called Puritanism is in reality Judaism.”

    Max Weber’s book, “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” created a split definition. Jewish capitalism on one side, and Puritan (Calvanist) on the other. Jewish capitalism was speculative pariah capitalism, while Puritan was bourgeois organization of labor. Weber excluded the problem of usury, thus obscuring what is necessary to see. The Puritan was excluded from blame.

    The Church has used its great intellectual talent, also including the Catholic Schoolmen, to study the problem of usury and the jew, but this intellectual tradition has been overturned and subverted, or not learned, and as a consequence we have judazier christianity.

    If you are a Pastor reading this, there is no longer any excuse for you to preach “Judeo-Christianity” as there is no such thing. It is an implanted memory, funded into existence.

    • Agree: GeeBee
  40. 450.org says:

    Speaking of financial parasites, the parasitic elites if you will, they soooo want to get their hands on social security and one way to do that is create a crisis like bankrupting the programming. Biden and Trump are no different when it comes to this. They both want to privatize social security which is to say, they both want to end social security as a public program.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/04/trump-wants-a-payroll-tax-cut-why-some-say-its-a-terrible-idea.html

    “The main problem with the proposal is that it would go to the people who least need help,” Burman said. “It seems like you’re deliberately targeting it to people who are in the best situation … the ones who are still working.”

    The economic recession will likely speed up the exhaustion date for the Social Security trust funds, Burman said. Any plans for payroll tax cuts would have to include ways to replenish those funds, which are currently scheduled to run out in 2035. At that time, 79% of promised benefits will be payable.

    “Trump’s actions are a war on seniors,” Nancy Altman, president of advocacy organization Social Security Works, said in a statement. “He wants to open up the economy, even though COVID-19 is disproportionately costing seniors their lives.

    “Now he is insisting on threatening Social Security on which most seniors rely for their food, medicine and other basic necessities,” she added.

    • Replies: @450.org
    , @RadicalCenter
  41. 450.org says:
    @450.org

    This will negatively affect so many of his unwashed supporters, it boggles the mind they worship him as he pisses on them time and time again.

  42. @Mefobills

    Werner Sombart in his book “The Jews and Modern Capitalism” came to an important conclusion.”That which is called Puritanism is in reality Judaism.”

    Jake here

    https://www.unz.com/comments/all/?commenterfilter=Jake

    has been consistently saying that right along.

    • Thanks: Mefobills
  43. Endeavor says:
    @nsa

    Use a version of an Earned Income tax credit paid with each paycheck. Must work 40 hours a week. Make minimum wage $10 an hour and get $100 tax free from gov for every 40 hours. If an employer paid $12.50 an hour we would be close to the cherished $15 hour mark .Strict time and a half for all workers. Free riders can sit home with no income.

  44. neutral says:

    One can only understand this problem if one can see that the jews have near total control of this parasitic system. Talking about the system but never having the courage to talk about the people that actually run it gets one no where.

  45. Mefobills says:
    @Farrakhan.DDuke.AliceWalker.AllAgree

    Industrial Capitalism was invented in Mass Bay Colony. It was something new in the world, and finance capital has been fighting back ever since. The founding of the country was a battle for the two types of economy, with one or the other ascendant.

    Bills of Credit (bank money) was aimed at new Iron Works and Industry, hence “Industrial Capitalism.” The colony did not have metal money, it had idle workers, and it needed self defense – especially iron.

    By contrast, when James Watt (early 1800’s) invented the steam engine, he used his own savings. The Bank of England (1694) did not channel new credit into creating and improving industry. Even though England was the seat of Industrial revolution, the funding for industrial revolution was despite BOE, and not because of it.

    American system can be traced through John Winthrop (early 1600’s) to Cotton Mather (late 1600’s) to Benjamin Franklin (mid 1700’s). Franklin’s protege was Mathew Carey, who wrote on the system while in Pennsylvania Colony. Franklin’s colony had a state bank that issued bills of credit against land, prevented said bills debt from going exponential, and also issued debt free from state bank, so money supply could pay the interest. Matthew Carey observed all of this and wrote on it. Henry Carey was the Son of Matthew. Henry Carey was Lincoln’s (early mid 1800’s) economic advisor. Henry Clay adopted and promoted the system.

    Before Civil war 1865, the “American System” was comprehended by Frederick List (early 1800’s) he used the concepts to help organize a new Germany into existence. Lincoln system after war induced white revolution (1917-23) in Russia. Finance Jews and plutocracy were not pleased. Bolshevism was finance Jews with their red revolution (1917…on) overturning the white revolution.

    Mass Bay created Bills of Credit (bank money at debt) and CHANNELED them toward industry. This then improved the future, and improved labor’s ability to be productive. Merchants were forced to take the bills of credit as if they were money (specie).

    Mass Bills were debt free money (not bills of credit), something like Lincoln’s Greenbacks. Mass Bills were spent into circulation, not loaned. These bills circulated to pay taxes and interest on the bills of credit. When spent, Mass Bills channeled toward productivity and not speculation.

    Here is the decoder ring for industrial capitalism:

    STATE CREDIT (not private bank credit) channels into industry and production modes
    Debt Free money is also issued, and channels into production and not speculation.
    Taxes take up the debt free.
    Any interest derived profits from the state bank are recycled to Treasury, or respent into the commons or on production modes.
    (Some private banks lower in the system can be tolerated if their credit emission hypothecations are controlled to prevent speculation)
    Banks lower down in the system tend to be Giro, something like a Savings and Loan, where hypothecation is forbidden.

    Decoder Ring for Finance Capitalism

    Private Central Bank emits credit based on Public Debts
    Private Banks within the system, hypothecate individuals or companies. No concern is had for speculation or usury. (All profits are equally good no matter how they are made.)
    No Debt Free Money to pay for interest or savings.
    The Money power is in private hands and hence for private interests to make gains.

    The concept of Industrial Capitalism really came to the fore when Germany unified under Bismark 1871. Bismark used List’s industrial capitalism methods (early 1800’s) of low internal tariffs, high external tariffs, and spending state credit into industry. Marx (mid 1800’s) observed England vs Germany and that was the basis for his worldview.

  46. Truth says:

    Hey guys, speaking of the topic, the single greatest Commie relief package in American history was introduced almost a year before Donald The Great White Conservative signed it into law…

  47. @450.org

    The propagandist is either uninformed or intentionally misleading if she is implying that we know this virus is much worse for old people than other flu viruses we regularly experience.

    As for the virus disproportionately killing old people, of course it does; flu viruses always do.

    I agree, however, that suspending the payroll tax is not the way to go right now. And that trump and other plutocrats behind both parties may indeed want to cut or eliminate social security, which is heartless and ill-advised.

    I would prefer major cuts to both military spending and welfare bureaucracy, with the savings used to partially offset the cost of a Universal Basic Income.

    Having said all that, the payroll tax revenues are not reserved in any legally binding way for social security benefits. Cutting payroll tax does not diminish the gov revenue available for social security any more than cutting other fed taxes enough to reduce overall revenue.

    Moreover, a tax on payroll tends to deter and reduce hiring at the margins. So, we might be wise to replace the payroll tax with things that don’t deter hiring, e.g. higher taxes on very high incomes and new excise taxes.

  48. Mefobills says:

    Hudson won’t name the Jew as being an agent for mammon.

    But he does say this:

    In Judaism, Jesus accused the Pharisees of loving money and replacing the Jubilee year with Rabbi Hillel’s prosbul in which debtors waived their rights to have a debt cancellation under the Jubilee Year.

    Jewish oral tradition was “secret” and hid their money power. In 66-70 AD when Rome destroyed the Temple at Jersualem, there wasn’t any reaction from Jewish diaspora. Why no reaction?

    Trajan’s (Rome) eastern Conquest interdicted wealthy Jewish Merchants who had long made their usury on the East/West mechanism. Jews moved gold west and silver east, and then took rents on the exchange rate difference. Controlling of money has always been a Jewish crime family method. Money is the Jew’s god.

    In Cyrene the Jews massacred 220,000 Greeks, in Cyrpus 240,000, and in Egypt .. a multitude; this according to Edward Gibbon, citing ancient sources in his “Decline and Fall of Roman Empire.”

    Gibbon also noted that Jews were not allowed to land on Cyrpus and if even shipwrecked there, were put to death. The Cypriot city of Salmis was destroyed, and Roman forces had to rescue Greeks in Alexandria.

    Ancient sources have a common theme, of Jews falling on the Greeks as if mad, or in the grip of some terrible spirit of rebellion. There are tales of Jews spinning their bodies and unwinding Greek entrails, in an orgy of blood lust.

    The timing of the massacre outbreak is connected with Trajan’s Parthian war. The Caravan route to India went through Parthia. Trajan interdicted the real Jewish god of Moloch/Mammon.

    The Jew’s god is usury Moloch/Mammon. The Verbal Tradition is Caballa. Talmud is the verbal tradition written down.

    Seen this way, money has become a religion.

  49. Skeptikal says:
    @restless94110

    “Again, I fine Hudson’s doom and gloom conspiracy theory that the biggies are deliberately grabbing everything to be specious. ”

    What’s “specious” about it?

    specious: “apparently right or proper : superficially fair, just, or correct but not so in reality : appearing well at first view”

    I repeat, what is “specious” about Hudson’s statement regarding the fact that wealth is being “sucked up” instead of “trickling down”?

    It is an established fact. Established via arithmetic. There are rafts of statistics and other types of information, such as data on the levels of debt in the USA, and other metrics, that support Hudson’s statement.

    Nothing “specious” about it.

    Unfortunately.

    • Replies: @restless94110
  50. The world is certainly awash with dollars and debt, but the Fed’s crackpot Keynesianism and MMT are not the answers. You have to produce before you can consume. Giving out freshly printed (actually electronic) dollars to everyone does nothing but cause price inflation. Myopic corporations stopped caring about their employees decades ago when they started shipping unskilled and semi-skilled jobs to China. Their crony-capitalist corporate officers were and are too greedy to realize that people can’t buy their products if they can’t make a living. The bigwigs would ship every job non-executive job to China if they could. What USA needs to do is bring back as many jobs from the rest of the world as we can.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  51. Mefobills says:
    @Johnny C Goode

    Giving out freshly printed (actually electronic) dollars to everyone does nothing but cause price inflation

    In a debt money system, endogenous debts can be paid down with exogneous money.

    MMT analysis makes that clear.

    Endogneous is a fancy word, for being “inside” the private banking system. Exogenous means outside of the system.

    Treasury creates U.S. dollars (not federal reserve notes which are endogneous), and the dollars are forced to channel to then pay down loan principle. When principle is written down, the money disappears (or can be forced back to Treasury).

    The money supply does not inflate, because no purchasing power made it into pockets of spenders.

    Debt relief does not necessarily mean erasing, it can also mean exogenous money channeling into paying off principle.

    Legally erasing or paying down has the same effect, debts are erased. Private debts especially have to be erased, as they are making claims outside of nature’s ability to pay.

    • Replies: @Jedi Night
  52. Mefobills says:
    @Timothy Madden

    How else does any thinking man or woman account for the fact that banks all over the world own everything while producing nothing? This isn’t bleeping rocket science.

    The answer (or at least one answer) is to use Savings and Loans, or as they were called in Canada, Trusts. Giro banking.

    New Debtor receives purchasing power from Creditor. Creditor in this case is a saver, and not the bank creating new credit from nothing.

    H.R. 2990 bill would have converted the U.S. money supply from Federal Reserve Notes into U.S. Dollars, and banks would become Giro.

    It could be done overnight, with a law change.

    But,…. but… Congress is paid off lackeys, sock puppets for their plutocratic masters. The congress has to be bypassed as they don’t serve the people, but instead serve their masters.

    https://www.monetary.org/images/pdfs/HR-2990.pdf

    • Replies: @Timothy Madden
  53. Greg Bacon says: • Website

    “Gold is the money of kings; silver is the money of gentlemen; barter is the money of peasants; but debt is the money of slaves.” Norm Franz

    http://libertytree.ca/quotes_by/norm+franz

    And a line from some forgotten thinker:

    “You can shear a sheep many times, but skin it only once.”

    Welcome to debt-bondage hell slave, now STFU and get back to work, if you still have a job.

  54. @Mefobills

    Deep:

    The concept of Industrial Capitalism really came to the fore when Germany unified under Bismark 1871. Bismark used List’s industrial capitalism methods (early 1800’s) of low internal tariffs, high external tariffs, and spending state credit into industry. Marx (mid 1800’s) observed England vs Germany and that was the basis for his worldview.

  55. @Mefobills

    In Cyrene the Jews massacred 220,000 Greeks, in Cyrpus 240,000, and in Egypt .. a multitude; this according to Edward Gibbon, citing ancient sources in his “Decline and Fall of Roman Empire.”

    See it here:

    HISTORY OF THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE
    Edward Gibbon, Esq.
    With notes by the Rev. H. H. Milman
    VOLUME TWO
    Chapter XVI: Conduct Towards The Christians, From Nero To
    Constantine.–Part I.

    From the reign of Nero to that of Antoninus Pius, the Jews discovered a fierce impatience of the dominion of Rome, which repeatedly broke out in the most furious massacres and insurrections. Humanity is shocked at the recital of the
    horrid cruelties which they committed
    in the cities of Egypt, of Cyprus, and
    of Cyrene, where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting
    natives
    ; [1] and we are tempted to applaud the severe retaliation which was
    exercised by the arms of the legions against a race of fanatics, whose dire
    and credulous superstition seemed to render them the implacable enemies
    not only of the Roman government, but of human kind. [2]

    https://freeclassicebooks.com/2019%20New%20Free%20Classic%20ebooks/D-H/Gibbon%20Edward/pdf%20Files/The%20History%20Of%20The%20Decline%20And%20Fall%20Of%20The%20Roman%20Empire%20Vol%202.pdf

    • Replies: @GeeBee
  56. Johnwho says:

    ‘These debt-bondage economies of Western countries are heading us down a spiral of poverty, decline, injustice and human despair’
    They are actually talking about you, and how they have exploited you for centuries by insiuating that you are too dumb to think for yourself.
    They are not smarter, they are just too cunning. Got all that money to hire intelligence such as it is, and determined to drive a Porche while everybody elese drives a second hand piece of shit.
    It is all about nationalism and believing in people of your race and casting the rest out. Yup, very racist I know and don’t care.
    Embrace equality between racists who only care about themselves and their families. It’s not just about color, I almost married a native indian from the West coast, cuz I liked her and she had courage and loyalty. I almost married a half breed Chinese; cuz I liked her personality even though she wasn’t much to look at. I would even in my youth, very seldom think of marrying a white woman; because too much baggage influenced by largely Jewish Female authors seeking to create a split between white women and white men, and they did very well at it – got us to hate each other. What the fuck with that? We were born to live together as partners and now we get pretty much primordial opinions laid on us as a way of life? To whose advantage? I turned down lots of white girls because they had this Jewish owned feminisism growed in their heads. Nice girls one and all, but who can deal with that on a daily basis?
    But hey! I coulda married either one of those other girls and I would have been a much happier man.

  57. Good interview. Theres really only 3 things that I can see happening.

    1 Revolution.. think Bolshevik
    2 Collapse…. followed by chaos, revolution
    3 Nuked or destroyed in conventional war… which seems to be DC’s preferred route

    One of these 3 things will eventually happen, probably soon if they choose to stay on this course, which they will.

    I don’t think we’ll make it to the hippy scenario where the global warming kills us, perhaps we could last long enough to poison all the water, kill off the bees with poisons, which would kill us.

    Not that I necessarily want any of these things to happen, this is just the reality of the situation. I would love to live in a normal society where our overlords weren’t obsessed with money and keeping us at each others throats. Where everyone made enough money to live happily and comfortably, and still have time to spend with family.

    They have total control over the media, they’ll continue using that to try and incite civil war, get the slaves to kill their fellow slaves. They’ll probably use some Blackwater mercs to pull off some kind of false flag, shooting some Antifas or black folks, set off some riots. The whole show in Michigan this week was staged by DeVos, some of the guys there looked like mercs, they’re already creating the narrative. Those dudes weren’t protesting, they were there to protect the status quo.

    Politics/democracy is a sham, the only purpose of Dem and Repub parties is to protect the rich, the capitalists, including themselves, keep everyone divided and fighting over trivial BS, same as the media. I said it before CIA//MIC/Wall St run the country at this point, the politics is just a show.

    Don’t look for things to get any better, they seem hellbent on destroying everything to maintain their own privilege, and they will. If this virus episode hasn’t shown you that, you should probably stick to Fox News. They’re too greedy and corrupt to ever compete with China, they would rather keep playing their old games. They would rather continue pissing away money on losing wars than invest in America or Americans. No reason we should be putting people in debt for an education. No reason we should be importing people to do jobs that Americans can do.

    Like Hudson said the whole system is just too rotten at this point, nothing good can come of it. Its sad.

  58. Alfa158 says:
    @tomo

    Ron put an article up last week telling us that FaceBook has de-platformed Unz and any of its content.
    https://www.unz.com/announcement/facebook-bans-the-unz-review/
    There is any election this November and it was actually a couple of months ago that the US social media companies began de-platforming political dissidents. They started with the smallest sites and are gradually ramping up the size of their targets. There is in fact a strong push going on to ban Trump from Twitter and Facebook.

  59. Here, is a revealing statement by Dr. Hudson:

    Michael Hudson: ” I think Bernie added that it should be given to self-employed, to retirees, and to aliens living here. You have also to give it to everybody, or else they are going to be out in the street. It has to be general.”

    I suppose that Dr. Hudson would advocate that these illegal and legal aliens vote in our elections as well.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  60. @Chris Moore

    We all know who They are. “internalise” is a misnomer, though. You do not call it ‘internalisation’ when it seeps out of your collective buttcrack. Or did those Sixmillions smell like chocolate, was 911 folowed by streets covered in icing sugar? But I get your point. Only, both instances were preplanned, not just exploited for gain. Crapped out and embraced, not analysed and internalised. And to disbelieve is blashemy!

  61. @bluedog

    I know you are being funny, but exuddi for one gets excited. Those “write-offs” were not written off, they were, for the connected, paid off by taxpayers. The ‘common investor’ just lost their money. Right now, Zion is ‘educating’ us all on the need for debt write-offs. For the connected, of course. Paid from our taxes. There will be no Jubilee, or, in the words of every capitalist wonker out there: “But who’s gonna pay for it???”
    I love it when ‘economists’ use the dotcom crash as an example. There was no crash. It was pure bullshit from beginning to end, people ‘investing’ in something they heard of, called dot com. What, exactly, was the investment? Please, anyone, come tell me, what was the frigging investment. A dotcom site costs what, ten dollars a year? WHAT WAS THE INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY? Or, as one of thiose ‘brokers’ insisted with a blank stare; “…but, but it’s Dot Com!” He just could not believe my stupidity for not buying in too…
    Of course, I did not realise the size of the scam, and the “institutional support’. Economics is mostly just a scam whereby Zion gets to change the law as it suits their business models.

  62. GeeBee says:
    @Farrakhan.DDuke.AliceWalker.AllAgree

    I have read much of Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, but not until I read your excerpt did I understand why my daughter, when studying for her degree in Classics nearly ten years ago at Bristol University in England, was told in no uncertain terms that Gibbon (whose remarkable mastery of pretty much all the available classical sources surely puts him in a class of his own) was more or less forbidden as a suitable source for their researches in any circumstances. Neither, in fact, was any work published before the 1970s-’80s.

    In the latter case of course, there was the risk that they did not sufficiently emphasise the toxic strictures of Third Wave Feminism, whereas in the case of Gibbon, it would appear, the ‘problem’ was that he told the truth about Jews…

  63. @Mefobills

    Yes I agree to a point. Equity means that nobody gets something for nothing.

    If all creditors were required to be money-lenders such that it always cost them $100,000 to loan $100,000, then the only source of new money would be the central monetary authority that would receive the underwriting credit for all net new credit or loans.

    The private creditors would in effect loan their depositors money to borrowers but I am talking about the net increase from one period to the next – that is new money and someone has to get credit for it.

    If we did that, then there would be little need for taxation.

    Banks do not create money and they do not create new credit from nothing – they reinsure the secured credit that they receive from the lead-underwriters. The result is as if they were creating money from nothing – but that is not in fact the process that they follow.

    When the bank receives the promissory note and mortgage from the pretended borrower they record that the bank has received credit from the issuer of the security – just as you or I would do. But they never pay it back because the securities are filled with illegal devices by which the bank charges-off its debt to the real creditor.

    What I am saying is that the documentation itself has become scandalously criminal on its face. But approximately 25,000 PhD’s in Economics globally are utterly oblivious to it because they never actually read any actual securities – they just endlessly debate theoretical constructs that have nothing to do with what is going on in the real markets or the real world.

  64. Industrial vs financial capitalism sounds like a slogan designed to avoid the elephant in the room: fractional reserve banking.

    • Replies: @onebornfree
  65. Mefobills says:
    @David Schmitt, Ph.D.

    I suppose that Dr. Hudson would advocate that these illegal and legal aliens vote in our elections as well

    The conversation hinged on pandemic response, which was to give aliens aide. The idea being they would not be wandering around being a disease vector.

    What was not said. If you can inject state credit into supporting aliens, you can also use state credit to fund their removal.

    I’ve long maintained that had Hitler been just a little more clever, he could have used Schacht’s Mefobill system to pay for removal of undesirable aliens.

    A bill is a three part “order.” It has a drawer, payee, and drawee.
    The drawer is the creditor, or person who is paying. Payee is the person who is receiving. Drawee is third person…usually a bank.

    Schacht created a “shell” front company, something like the Resolution Finance Corporation in the U.S.. The German analog was called Metallurgische Forschungsgesellschaft or Metallurgical Research Corporation in English.

    The naming was an inside joke against the gold bugs of that era, because Germany had no gold. Schacht was always a gold man, but by this time in his professional development, he was evolving away from lower concepts like metal = money.

    The great thing about a bill system is that it is not general purchasing power, it is SPECIFIC purchasing power. The three parties are specified, channeling is specified, and legally a sovereign could add even more specific criteria.

    Because it is specific purchasing power, the opportunity exists to target industry, or basically anything you want to then get an effect. This notion of targeting is key to understanding how to recover industry back to the U.S., or remove alien threats.

    The bill worked like this: 1) Shell corporation is given a directive from political authority for X amount of purchasing power to be issued. 2) Shell corporation types up the bill. Shell is then the drawee… but not really, more on this later. 3) Payee receives the bill as new purchasing power, to then make goods. Or, if you are an alien it is an order that funds your trip back to Mexico, or wherever. 4) The bill is turned into a bank for discount. Discount means that the bank gives the bill holder money.

    Drawee is normally the banker, Drawer is normally the person paying, and Payee is normally the person receiving the funds. Think of it like your checking account.

    The bill system has 1) A political system making the order. 2) A shell corporation to type of the “bill” 3) A payee to receive the funds (could be aliens or whoever) 4) A bank legally receives the bill for discounting 5) Reichsbank who then swaps reichsmarks for the bill.

    So the three part scheme was increased to five parts. Bank that received bill for discounting, could turn it over to Reichsbank (central bank) for Reichsmarks, and hence bank was an intermediary and actor for the Central Bank.

    In the U.S. the bill system could be used to recover industry, as new purchasing power channels toward a political or strategic goal. New industry forms and is paid for its produce.

    Or, some nominal funds are paid for alien removal. They self deport. This is a non-violent way to induce people to leave, and it funded by the future, which is stimulated to produce goods and wealth.

    The bill can have high specificity. For example, Maria and Manuel can discount the bill only for dollars, or X amount of Peso’s, or even specific goods (so many tampons, diapers, etc.).

    When the bill is swapped by bank it arrived at the Reichsbank. U.S. could order FED to accept bills in the same way they accept Mortgage Backed Securities and other paper onto their ledger.

    I get your sentiments that third world aliens being rewarded for their crimes is anathema. The other crime is that our political and economic establishment is occupied by a different hostile and predatory alien group.

    The problems facing the U.S. are technically easy to solve. Ejecting the hostile and predatory alien elite is the harder problem.

    • Replies: @David Schmitt, Ph.D.
  66. @Mefobills

    Debt relief does not necessarily mean erasing, it can also mean exogenous money channeling into paying off principle.

    This is the key to any modern Jubilee. When you get into the nuts and bolts of actually implementing debt cancellation, the real obstacle is contact law. The federal government simply doesn’t have the legal power to abrogate all the contracts, and the attempt to do so creates a lot of really pissed off people (the ones being screwed over in the deal).

    The only workable Jubilee is a win win version in which debts are cancelled by being paid off. We could even trap the money in the banking system by raising reserve requirements, if necessary to prevent inflation. Or would the money simply disappear, extinguished as the debts are paid? Your thoughts?

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  67. @GeeBee

    Thank you for acknowledging.

    Had a cyber copy of that excerpt on an old machine where the statement

    where they dwelt in treacherous friendship with the unsuspecting natives

    concluded with the phrase

    who had welcomed them;

    Don’t remember if that was a thought I had added myself, if some editor did it, or if there is an edition with those being the words of Gibbon himself.

    But in any case that appendage is almost certainly implicitly true and highlights how truly evil Jew hostility for goyim is.

    Look how white Americans have welcomed the Jews and snapped their own spines bending over backward in an effort to avoid treating (((them))) in any way but with Christian love, and in turn the Jew works relentlessly in instinctive concert with his fellow Jews to achieve white genocide.

  68. Mefobills says:
    @Jedi Night

    We could even trap the money in the banking system by raising reserve requirements,

    You won’t hear what I am about to say from any other economist. Maybe Hudson will understand, but he stays away from NSDAP economy, so he has limited himself.

    Banks are not reserve constrained now. Reserves of banks are not really part of the working/purchasing real part of the economy.

    You are correct about contract law. Also, there is the problem of debt instruments being dispersed, as they are on-sold into “free markets.” In other words, debt instruments are not housed in a state bank, and hence there is no easy way to access them in our (I’m American) privateer system.

    Some way to vector exogenous money at the debt instrument will pay said debts down. The trick is to channel the money in a specific way, so that it never causes inflation.

    A bill system would work… as long as the channeling aspect is not ignored. The channeling aspect of bills means that you can reach out and touch debt instruments. They can be targeted.

    Working within the current private debt system. It would require a new Special Purpose Vehicle SPV and telling the FED to accept Bills.

    1) Issue new Tbills as public debt.
    2) TBills are then cranked through a SPV (special purpose vehicle entity) to convert the public debt/ TBill into Mefo-bills. Or, lets call them RFC bills after Reconstruction Finance Corporation.
    2) Each new RFC Bill specifies the payee person to be paid, and how the money is to only go toward debt relief. The new bills are mailed out, and they look like a check.
    3) The Payee who receives the funds, then co-signs it over to their mortgage holder, or car loan, or whatever. It can only go toward principle, to pay down debt. It specifies on the bill the only way it can channel, and that is toward debt relief.
    4) Mortgage holder Creditor then co-signs, and turns RFC bill over to the FED, where it is taken up onto the FED ledger.
    5) FED’s balance sheet expands with RFC as asset and emits new Federal Reserve Notes as a liability.
    6) FED notes electronically transfer through bank reserve system to the Mortgage/Debt Bank Holder.
    7) Principle on double entry ledger of Mortgage Bank decrements, and the FED notes disappear from existence.

    Assets and Liabilities cancel each other out and disappear.

    At the end of the day, there is new public debt in the form of Tbills held at SPV , the FED balance sheet expanded with RFC bills, and private debts were reduced.

    The interest claims on new TBill’s can be dealt with at time of TBill issuance, making them low interest. The SPV holds the TBills anyway and can make no interest claims.

    Basically there is no excuse for not releasing private debts. It technically can be done. I just outlined 7 steps that would work.

    The main problem is there is lack of political will, and politicians who are sock puppets of finance class.

    As Hudson says, there is no planning class in our society to plan the future. Having a population divert their life energy to parasites must by definition, mean that host will die.

    Reducing private debts then allows life-giving, as the working laboring population can buy goods and services from each other, rather than being milked to pay finance oligarchy.

    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
  69. @Mefobills

    Thank you, Mefobills. That was extremely informative. I was unaware of those interesting details. I am a bit unclear about how one actually passive-aggressively effects the self-deportations. A plane or bus ticket to the land of origin is understandable. Besides the expense of returning, I do not see a practical means of increasing the likelihood that the ejected aliens will remain in their homeland. We already have a bilge pump that is overworked by the holes in our sovereign ship od state. I understand that the porous border is not the specific responsibility of the mefobills system. But the two sub-systems of border control and this mefobill sub-system must be coordinated to act in concert if the total system is to make sense regarding this particular aspect the government enticing desired, restorative outcomes.. Other than the transportation home, the rest of the directed payment system (your example being “tampons”) are generally fungible and I am not sure that we would not be simply paying for a trip home to visit family before the aliens’ quick return—with families in tow. Most likely, I am simply not imaginative enough in the arts of economic and bureaucratic enforcement techniues for tasks such as making the alien’s homeland sufficiently “sticky.” Well, I suppose if we can use this system to fund tampons for migrants, perhaps we can stimulate our construction and enforcement industries to provide some border and internal migratory tamponade. But you cite my concern exactly, with parasitically unreliable forces at the top channeling these, in-principle, excellent tools, we could witness an even sorrier condition evolve.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  70. Mefobills says:
    @David Schmitt, Ph.D.

    parasitically unreliable forces

    Exactly.

    Problems can also be opportunities.

    Our so called leadership WANTS immigrants for the following reasons: 1) Lower wage prices. 2) Make Capital Ascendant (see #1) 3) De-racinate the population so it loses its history. 4) Make the population more compliant (see #3) and also lower IQ. 5) Pit the population against each other with identity politics, so it doesn’t look up at its masters.

    Voters have been voting against immigration for decades now, yet it persists. It is not a bug in the system, but a feature when something persists.

    The waves of migrants are paid. They receive micro-loans, many such loans from the (((usual suspects))).

    It would be easy enough to interdict the micro-loan mechanism. The Devils hiding places become known if you know where to look.

    All civilizations have hierarchy. To suggest that free markets are god, and should be governing mechanism for society, is seriously retardation-level narrative.

  71. Agreed on all points. Do we have an IQ barrier as they want us to believe? I do not think so. there is sufficient right-end tail. But, I would hazard a guess that potential leaders, intellects and critics are neutralized and decapitated. This decapitation will become keener as the surveillance state continues its rapid consolidation. We have a serious problem that our population–unlike the oligarchs–do not recognize nor respond to the importance and practical value of the intellect—their own intellects for that matter. They do not understand or deeply respect the intellect of the current oligarchs. Contrarily, they do obediently respect the ‘power’ of the oligarchs. The oligarchs achieved power first, then used the power of advertising, entertainment, journalism, academia and the law to create their own celebrity status–again, after the conquest. Furthermore, we have a tremendous problem with accumulating capital. (I need to catch up on the other comments to see if some of this has been answered by you or others.) Lastly, though submissive to the overlords, our population is fiercely independent, competitive and unhelpfully distrustful of each other. Thus, they are unable to distinguish cooperativity (appropriately integrated with self-initiative) from their indoctrinated notion of collectivism.

    • Agree: Mefobills
  72. Mefobills says:

    These things are coming:

    People are hunkering down and driven by their anxieties due to financial problems. What is kept out of discussion? Their money is running out, people’s ability to pay rent, pensions disappearing, social security doesn’t cover expenses, etc. The Coronavirus lockdown exacerbated what was already in motion.

    At the same time there are insane attempts to provoke China. Forty years of neo-liberalism “free markets” have destroyed us and is crashing. Jobs have been outsourced because only prices matter.

    Neoliberalism does not understand debt, because their economic orthodoxy teaches “money is a neutral veil.” Actually it is economic hypnosis designed to confuse.

    Bush and Obama did not deal with the speculative bubble in 2008 and went with bank bailouts. These huge volumes of funds went to bailout the bank speculators who caused the problem.

    Systemically important banks were labeled as TBTF,. After 2008 mechanisms were put into place to bail out the finance banking sector, and that machinery is still in place today. Hammer meet nail.

    Neoliberalism injects money into speculation and not production.

    2019 the collapse was already in progress, and Coronavirus triggered today’s depression. (We are in a debt depression now.. there will be no V shaped recovery.)

    Main street lending program from Congress is 200Billion is going to big banks 75Billion to leverage into 750B is also going to big banks to then be used for FED to purchase bad debt off of bank books. 75Billion guaranteed by the Treasury to then be leveraged for speculation. Finance is doing slight-o-hand, as their business model is crime inc.

    Indicators from 2019 Repo Crises is based on corporate debt and hedge funds who could not cover 24 hour debt. Their gambles were going bad. The fed had to jump in with 150B and then more QE. The FED produced even more liquidity by buying junk bonds and other bad assets from the books of banks and shadow banks.

    Physical sector economy is signaling distress: Farm sector bankruptcies up 20%. Farmer suicides are up. Retail bankruptcy like J.C. Penny, Sears, and many more. In 2019 a record 9,275 retail stores filed for bankruptcy despite record high credit card debt. (Plus Amazon effect).

    Loss of jobs in goods producing sector: 81000 losses in 3’rd quarter, Manufacturing losses -67000, mining -13000, construction -1000.

    When there is a Ratio of debt to earnings of 6:1 it is considered a distressed company.. The oil industry ratio is 20:1. Oil prices are not going up to pay this debt overhang. Over 300B of debt is coming due in next four years, and most of that is a basis for derivative speculation.

    The banking system is filled with private, student, corporate, municipal, state, hospital debts, etc.

    One approach is to go through bankruptcy. A new glass steagall would protect commercial bank clients. Commercial banking has to be separated from wall street speculative banks, so the swindlers will not be rewarded.

    Commercial banks have pensions, savings accounts, and deposits from the real physical economy. So, the idea is to ring-fence the swindlers and let them take a hit, while protecting the real physical economy.

    While I do recommend targeted “buy downs” of debt (see my comments previous) there are bankruptcy laws on the books that can be used.

    Economic pain might have to become even greater before the (((neo-liberals))) are ejected from the citadels of power.

    That, or revolution.

  73. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    “Industrial vs financial capitalism sounds like a slogan designed to avoid the elephant in the room: fractional reserve banking.”

    Shhhh! Or you might disturb all of the morons.

    Also, any time you get a Marxist trying to get people to believe that there are [two? or more?] different types of “capitalism” , you can rest assured that they are merely pontificating about two labels for two somethings that have little, or nothing to do with capitalism [which can only exist in one form, not two, or more], and they are in fact engaging in a classic Straw man obfuscation in order to discredit true capitalism, about which they are completely ignorant of and wouldn’t know / understand if it hit them upside the head with a 2×4.

    Bottom line, “Industrial vs financial capitalism ” is just more, typical Marxist obfuscation and doublethink, which, of course, sounds very attractive and “correct” to the average economic know-nothing lint head, especially when reinforced by the tiresomely long, complicated, pseudo-intellectual blatherings and big government propaganda of one particular ” I’ve got the right plan, we all just need to get the government to do as I say”, long-winded, anti-freedom fantasist and court “intellectual” blowhard here.

    And so it goes…

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  74. Mefobills says:
    @onebornfree

    Tooth fairy lolbertarian capitalism.

    Max Weber in his essay “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism,” formulated the split definition of Jewish speculative pariah capitalism, while Puritan was was bourgeois organization of labor.

    So, Weber, like Lolbertarians, leaves usury out of account.

    To English Puritans – Jews of their day were representatives of the type of capitalism which was involved in war, government contracts, state monopolies, speculative promotions, and the the construction and financial projects of princes. Puritans condemned princes.

    Using this split definition, Weber Convinced himself that western capitalism is: A rational industrial organization tuned in alignment with regular market forces and not to political or irrational speculative opportunities for profit.

    Since Weber was able to observe reality and make rational conclusions, had he lived (died in 1920) through the roaring 20’s, then observed the great depression, then observed world war, he would have admitted to himself that these disasters were not isolated financial dealings. Admitted to himself is the operative concept, which some people are incapable of … apparently.

    Instead, the wars and economic distortions involved ‘capitalistic’ economies of entire nations, most especially the Western Nations as agressors.

    Pariah capitalism, if unchecked, overtime will assert for itself its dominance. Lolbertarians haven’t gotten the memo, or apparently the events of the real world are unable to convince its true believers.

    Checking, or blocking the forces of pariah capitalism, or in other words – fiance capitalism, requires government counter action.

    Weber’s (Calvinist) definition of western capitalism is tooth-fairy, or school-boy children’s version, obvious when looking back at events that occurred after his death in 1920.

    Fractional reserve is just another money power tool of the usurers, and is a symptom , not causation. The blind man feels the elephant’s tail, and thinks it is the elephant.

  75. There is nothing inherently wrong with financial intermediation as such, and in particular the charging of interest. I get the impression too many people here are throwing out the baby with the bath water.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  76. Mefobills says:
    @Beefcake the Mighty

    Finance intermediation works fine if the bank is Giro.

    Fractional Reserve with Hypothecation is definitely not Giro.

    Charging of interest is not always usury. Interest is forbidden on certain kinds of debts. This notion that there are different kinds of debts does not occur to modern people, as it is not part of our worldview… we have not been taught.

    Zippy Catholic describes the differences in loan types/debt types at link below. Lolbertarians do not understand these concepts as it is not part of their doctrine. Pay special attention to mutuum contracts.

    https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2014/11/10/usury-faq-or-money-on-the-pill/#23

    In general, if the money supply is pumped with debt free, then interest can be paid. This also is not comprehended by lolbertarians.

    Here is an article by a former lolbertarian, who finally realized he had been duped:

    https://prisonplanets.wordpress.com/2017/09/30/part-ii-jews-and-the-libertarian-movement-open-bord

    It’s no surprise that libertarians being overwhelmingly white and individualistic have a soft spot for open borders. They easily buy into the mainstream mantra that “race is only skin deep”. I’ve argued on the boards with libertarians on matters such as racial differences and open borders. They normally come across as either hostile or in complete denial. Libertarians for the most part are also clueless about an NWO conspiracy.

    Libertarians are usually against all authority including religious, parental, and of course the state which benefits the Jewish elites. I myself was a longtime libertarian but I’ve only recently discovered that I was being duped. Libertarians seldom point to any sort of ruling class, let alone a Jewish ruling class. The libertarian movement is essentially a giant gatekeeping operation that actually protects the establishment. They do this by misdirecting your attention towards blaming the government instead of those actually pulling the strings.

  77. @Mefobills

    Thanks for the link, looks like some very interesting stuff there. Although I think he overlooks the work of anti-open borders libertarians like Hoppe, and the extent to which Rothbard moved closer to Hoppe’s position towards the end.

  78. Ironic or part of the plan? Is Larry Fink ( CEO of BlackRock, now tasked with bailout advise for Corona-nation ) related to Moshe Fink the original owner of Fink’s Bar ( later bought by David Rothschild) … Benjamin Netanyahu’s threat to destroy the United States at Fink’s Bar in Jerusalem in 1990. “If we get caught they will just replace us with persons of the same cloth. So it does not matter what you do, America is a golden calf and we will suck it dry, chop it up, and sell it off piece by piece until there is nothing left but the world’s biggest welfare state that we will create and control. Why? Because it is the will of God, and America is big enough to take the hit so we can do it again and again and again. This is what we do to countries that we hate. We destroy them very slowly and make them suffer for refusing to be our slaves.” Asking what does it mean to be a fink? Also what is the relationship of the Rothschild worldwide banking system to BlackStone BlackRock and BlackCube ( just part of the same system only going darker under cover of a different name? )

    • Replies: @ImaBotKnot
  79. @restless94110

    Just like in the parlor game Monopoly, someone will eventually monopolize the board. Everybody else will be bankrupt. After a break for drinks and snacks, the game starts again. The previous game winner sacrifices his winnings to the bank and starts over as just another player.

    We are seeing that now. Previous winners are having their winnings diluted by the government as it prints a torrent of new money to compete with that held by the rich. A kind of jubilee. It has little effect on the poor since they will always be given enough to provide for the basic necessities. House, car, food, Obama phones.

    Those who work will be paid ever increasing wages based on some formula that determines the minimum wage. Those who do not will be provided for by unemployment money, in some form.

    And the game of “moving on up to the big house in the sky” can begin again. (There is some overlap between generations and just as some move up, others move down, at different times.)

    Many will gamble on the “market” and there will be many losers and a few winners. The winners will write books explaining how they did it. Many will try to duplicate their success. They will fail but their failures will pass unnoticed by the news media. The winners will, in another generation, become the rich all over again. For some odd reason, the winners will come from the same social group as before.

    And the rich will enjoy eating fine food, champaign, sitting in the sun on some tropical beach, playing tennis or golf, attending classical concerts, and all the other good things that the rich life provides.

    The poor, on the other hand will have to make do with good food, beer, sitting in the sun on their back porch, fishing, hunting, watching T.V. and complaining about how good the rich have it.

    And the game of life goes on. It’s what we do.

  80. Usura says:
    @Mefobills

    Libertarians are usually against all authority including religious, parental, and of course the state which benefits the Jewish elites. I myself was a longtime libertarian but I’ve only recently discovered that I was being duped. Libertarians seldom point to any sort of ruling class, let alone a Jewish ruling class.

    That isn’t accurate. Libertarians are for every other type of authority against state authority. Libertarian public interest groups are pro homeschooling, for example, i.e. pro-parental authority against state authority. Honestly you seem basically uninformed on libertarian doctrine.

    This goes along with another statement of yours from above, claiming libertarians are against “heirarchy”. If they are, how do you explain the vehement libertarian opposition to welfare like SNAP, EBT etc., which if implemented would almost immediately collapse many immigrant communities? What about their opposition to “affirmative action”? What about their advocacy of gun rights, another vector of hierarchical domination?

    I could give many more examples. There is a lot wrong with libertarianism, but your claim that they are inherently anti-hierarchical just will not hold water. In the context of a government which constantly panders to and protects stupid, obese poor people, libertarianism represents a desire for a return to hierarchy. I urge you to understand this point; libertarianism is to be analyzed from the right. I think you’ll profit from listening to the following discussion, which addresses this debate precisely; Spencer is a lightweight, but Bowden is a hero.

    The weakness of libertarianism is its obsession with freedom. But a caged lion also becomes obsessed with freedom; when in his pride overlooking the savannah, he thinks not of it.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
    , @Mefobills
  81. onebornfree says: • Website

    “The weakness of libertarianism is its obsession with freedom.”

    Ooh look! Yet another moron joins the “I used to be a [fake] libertarian”throng here . 🤮

    No regards, onebornfree

  82. @ImaBotKnot

    https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200102005320/en/FCLTGlobal-Appoints-New-Board-Directors-Strategic-Advisors FCLTGlobal, a non-profit organization that researches tools that encourage long-term investing, today announced the addition of new members to its Board of Directors. The following executives joined the board effective January 1, 2020: Strategic Advisors
    Dominic Barton, Canada’s Ambassador to China
    Else Bos, Executive Director and Chair of Prudential Supervision, De Nederlandsche Bank
    Natarajan Chandrasekaran, Chairman, Tata Sons
    Larry Fink, Chairman and CEO, BlackRock
    Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild, Founder and Chief Executive, Coalition for Inclusive Capitalism
    Martin Lipton, Founding Partner, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz
    Andrew N. Liveris, Senior Advisor, Teneo
    Nitin Nohria, Dean of Harvard Business School
    Mark Weinberger, Former Global Chairman and CEO, EY

  83. @HallParvey

    That’s not what happens. It’s not happening now. The winners will not end the game and start over. A jubilee would solve many issues, but it will take a very strong man to do it.

    If you have watched, listened to, or read any Hudson you know that what’s going on now is not the game of life and it’s not what we do.

  84. @Skeptikal

    I said nothing about that fact of economic behavior. What is specious is that is superficially fair, just or correct, but not the full reality. It is the surface but not deep enough to suggest actions. Thus what he says appears well at first view, but it suggests nothing and is therefore specious, promoting only hopelessness and stagnation.

    Everything specious about Hudson’s words.

  85. @annamaria

    You seem to be implying that an American professor in America needs to be afraid of the British government. Or of YouTube.

    And that is the reason that Hudson says nothing all the time? Because he is afraid? I don’t see any connection at all.

  86. Mefobills says:
    @Usura

    Libertarian public interest groups are pro homeschooling, for example, i.e. pro-parental authority against state authority. Honestly you seem basically uninformed on libertarian doctrine.

    Point taken, thanks. I agree there are elements in the doctrine that are worthwhile, especially small local government.

    The doctrine needs updating in my opinion, it is imbalanced, despite having elements that are worthwhile.

    An example of this imbalance is water rights, or the building of lakes and dams to improve the commons. The doctrine cannot accept that it takes some sort of eminent domain to do big civilization planning. Damming up the highland lake chain in central Texas was attempted by individuals with private financing, but it never worked. The floods persisted until the Federal Government stepped in.

    Basically, you can pound many lolbertarians with historical facts day and night, and they won’t budge. So, it then becomes something that is not fact based, but instead faith based… a religion.

  87. Mefobills says:
    @Usura

    Lolbertarians are also for democracy, which has shown itself as a disaster.

    quote from link below

    The best definition [of democracy] was given by the Russian philosopher Vasily Rozanov. ‘Democracy is the system by which an organized minority governs an unorganized majority.’ This ‘unorganized majority’ is the people, aggregated and individualistic, incapable of reaction because disjointed

    https://russia-insider.com/en/democracy-great-human-scourge-complete-disaster-western-civilization/ri27480

    The organized minority (money powered Jews and rentiers) work to take-down the unorganized majority. Majority is aggregated and individualistic and incapable of reaction.

    Because libertarianism blinds its adherents, they cannot understand how their pockets are being picked, and how they are being disenfranchised from the lands of their birth.

    • Replies: @Usura
    , @onebornfree
  88. Richard T says:

    The main thing we need to do is to create money without also simultaneously creating a debt. The world banking families however, will not allow that.

    • Replies: @the shadow
  89. @Richard T

    That is exactly so. And until the public comprehands this and oputs its feet down and say “no moree,” nothing will change. Hitler’s main crime was that he did exactly that which was the foundation for the German economic recovery.

  90. @HallParvey

    Hard to sit on your porch after you lose your house, though. That’s the terrifying situation that many Americans will face thanks to this lockdown — or the next one.

    The mass of poor Americans, including much of the former middle class, will be crammed in increasingly crowded, deteriorating, and heavily surveilled rental housing, or outright homeless.

    No more going back to good food, let alone home ownership, while griping in relative stability and safety about the rich.

    And weren’t we already heading that way, to some degree, even before the plan-demic?

  91. The mass of poor Americans, including much of the former middle class, will be crammed in increasingly crowded, deteriorating, and heavily surveilled rental housing, or outright homeless.

    True. The poor apparently prefer living in cities because of the amenities available. Otherwise the countryside would be peppered with small towns with prosperous, happy people.

    The middle class will still be around, selling insurance, cars, real estate. Government will still need firefighters, policemen, clerks, and other types of individuals. Small business will recover and provide roofing, plumbing, and other locally necessary work. Most will live in the suburbs.

    There will be disruptions and those who live from paycheck to paycheck will be the first to be hurt. There is no way to avoid that. The so called safety net is only as big and strong as the lawmakers say it is. The Coronavirus shutdown is such an event.

    I once heard that poor people have poor ways. There is truth in that. There is also the fact that there are those who suffer from various kinds of personal deficiencies. A child born with health problems that limit full developement is not going to prosper as he would have had he been born without the problem.

  92. Usura says:
    @Mefobills

    I agree with your and Rozanov’s description, but I find it ironic that the book review you linked references, in the first paragraph, another book attacking democracy written by a libertarian called “Democracy: The God That Failed”. Hoppe is a very senior and influential libertarian thinker, whom I’ve mentioned in other comments. He has several lectures attacking democracy on youtube, and they are all essential; here’s a short excerpt:

    Here’s a link to his book on the topic.

    https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/democracy-the-god-that-failed-hans-hermann-hoppe/1126499941?ean=9780765808684

    I hope that jogs some noggins regarding libertarian support of democracy.

    I very much like the distinction between the “organized minority” and “disorganized majority” you brought up. I have mixed thoughts about Curtis Yarvin, and don’t want to give him too much emphasis since I’ve brought him up twice in this thread, but he points out a distinction directly relevant to what you’ve said: why is it that in our society, mainstream media propaganda has a very positive view of the term “democracy”, whereas it has a very negative view of the term “politics”? If we lived in a democratic society, shouldn’t they be synonyms?

    One interpretation is that democracy codes for something amorphous, an idea or concept for the common people to inculcate, to turn them into an unorganized majority. Politics is a concrete activity that, from the perspective of the organized minority, must be discouraged among the commoners, lest they gain real influence, hence the negative stigma.

  93. onebornfree says: • Website
    @Mefobills

    “Libertarians are also for democracy, ”

    Total frickin’ horsecrap- but what do I expect from a pseudo-intellectual know-nothing such as yourself?

    As far as I’m aware, most libertarians are in favor of a very small, constitutionally limited, federal government, as originally conceived in and restricted by the Bill of Rights, AND NOTHING MORE.

    As Mencken observed:

    “Democracy is a sort of laughing gas. It will not cure anything, perhaps, but it unquestionably stops the pain.”

    “Liberty and democracy are eternal enemies, and every one knows it who has ever given any sober reflection to the matter. ”

    “Democracy is the worship of jackals by jackasses.”

    “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

    “If x is the population of the United States and y is the degree of imbecility of the average American, then democracy is the theory that x times y is less than y.”

    “All of democracy’s axioms “resolve themselves into thundering paradoxes, many amounting to downright contradictions in terms. The mob is competent to rule the rest of us – but it must be rigorously policed itself. There is a government, not of men, but laws – but men are set upon benches to decide finally what the law is and may be.”

    No regards, onebornfree

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  94. 76239 says:

    “His unique economic analysis has explored history’s main engine of economic exploitation”

    You mean the government?

    I never heard him utter one anti state sentiment. If anything Hudson’s first principle is to defend and empower the state over civilization.

    Much like Marx, Hudson is just another pinko in a long ling of envious, risk adverse, do nothing academics who want to live their lives at the expense of the producers of wealth.

  95. onebornfree says: • Website

    “Much like Marx, Hudson is just another pinko in a long ling of envious, risk adverse, do nothing academics who want to live their lives at the expense of the producers of wealth.”

    Exactly. Thank you. Well said.

    I would add that as well as living his life “at the expense of the producers of wealth”, he also fancies himself running everyone elses lives according to his personal dictates- just like all of the other government-adoring fantasist “academics” and “intellectual” blowhards and busybodies these days, especially those frequenting this site.

    Regards, onebornfree

  96. Mefobills says:
    @onebornfree

    I notice your argument is negation. You don’t say what you actually want. I agree democracy sucks by the way.

    If you pin a lolbertarian down on what they actually want, it will be some sort of vague hand waving about anarcho-capitalism, or maybe federalism.

    Libertarianism is discredited by the absence of any real world examples (countries that operate successfully on libertarian principles). History is spitting libertarianism out, and onto the ash heap.

    https://www.salon.com/2013/06/04/the_question_libertarians_just_cant_answer/

    As usual, thanks for being a tool who I can use to make others think.

  97. ‘It’s Donald Trump’s or the Democratic Party’s Obama-style MMT version known as Quantitative Easing. This approach says that deficits are indeed wonderful, as long as the government is running a deficit to spend on Wall Street, not into the “real” economy.’

    T.G.C. ‘explains’ how Q.E. is ‘supposed’ to affect the ‘real economy’?

    “The objection is sometimes raised that the major holders of gilts are pension funds and insurance companies, and they will not “spend” the extra money in the shops. But the big long-term savings institutions are reluctant to hold large amounts of money in their portfolios, because in the long run it is an asset with negligible returns. At the end of 2008 UK savings institutions had total bank deposits of about £130 billion. They will be reluctant to let the number double, but — if the £150 billion were allowed to pile up uselessly — that would be the result.
    What is the likely sequence of events? First, pension funds, insurance companies, hedge funds and so on try to get rid of their excess money by purchasing more securities. Let us, for the sake of argument, say that they want to acquire more equities. To a large extent they are buying from other pension funds, insurance companies and so on, and the efforts of all market participants taken together to disembarrass themselves of the excess money seem self-cancelling and unavailing. To the extent that buyers and sellers are in a closed circuit, they cannot get rid of it by transactions between themselves. However, there is a way out. They all have an excess supply of money and an excess demand for equities, which will put upward pressure on equity prices. If equity prices rise sharply, the ratio of their money holdings to total assets will drop back to the desired level. Indeed, on the face of it a doubling of the stock market would mean (more or less) that the £150 billion of extra cash could be added to portfolios and yet leave UK financial institutions’ money-to-total-assets ratio unchanged. 
    Secondly, once the stock market starts to rise because of the process just described, companies find it easier to raise money by issuing new shares and bonds. At first, only strong companies have the credibility to embark on large-scale fund raising, but they can use their extra money to pay bills to weaker companies threatened with bankruptcy (and also perhaps to purchase land and subsidiaries from them). 
    In short, although the cash injected into the economy by the Bank of England’s quantitative easing may in the first instance be held by pension funds, insurance companies and other financial institutions, it soon passes to profitable companies with strong balance sheets and then to marginal businesses with weak balance sheets, and so on. The cash strains throughout the economy are eliminated, asset prices recover, and demand, output and employment all revive. So the monetary (or monetarist) view of banking policy is in sharp contrast to the credit (or creditist) view. Contrary to much newspaper coverage, the monetary view contains a clear account of how money affects spending and jobs. The revival in spending, as agents try to rid themselves of excess money, would occur even if bank lending were static or falling. ”
    https://standpointmag.co.uk/issues/june-2009/the-unnecessary-recession-features-june-09-tim-congdon-gordon-brown-alistair-darling/

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  98. Mefobills says:
    @james charles

    Thanks for the link and comments.

    Irving Fisher pretty much nailed it. Very interesting.

    To my mind, if a bank creates bank credit, then it is credit … not money. Credit fluxes in an accounting way, returning to the ledger with time payments for principle and interest. Money floats, comes into existence as seigniorage, and is not under time pressure.

    Fisher was probably the first to identify debt deflation, which is what we have today. People are still arguing today when the argument was settled by Fisher 60 years ago.

    Just as Irving Fisher warned over 60 years ago, a restriction of bank credit stops the growth of households’ and companies’ deposits. The lack of money in the economy hits spending, profits and asset prices, and asset price falls lead to an unexpectedly high level of losses on bank’s loan assets. The result is a self-feeding and unstable downward spiral of retrenchment. In the 1933 article Fisher emphasised the sometimes paradoxical nature of this downward spiral. People repay bank debt in order to improve their financial circumstances, but — if everyone does so at the same time — the resulting fall in bank deposits (ie, in the quantity of money) causes a drop in prices and possibly an increase in the real value of the remaining debts. To quote from him again, “the mass effort to get out of debt sinks us more deeply into debt”.

    • Replies: @james charles
  99. Numerous articles about the real culprits behind ‘finance’ capitalism … and the destruction it brings to the 98% …

    https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2015/03/06/jews-and-moneylending-a-contemporary-case-file-part-1-of-3/

  100. @Mefobills

    “Fisher was probably the first to identify debt deflation, which is what we have today.”

    According to T. G. C., not for long?

    ‘ To recall, “From 1929 to 1933 several nations saw their banking systems implode, with contractions of balance sheets and the large-scale destruction of money balances. The result was a persistent deflationary malaise. By contrast, today governments and central banks are engaged in a binge of so-called ‘fiscal and monetary stimulus’. “The situation is evolving rapidly,…but it is already clear that the United States of America may in 2020 or early 2021 record the fastest increase in the quantity of money, broadly-defined, in its peacetime history. The main news this month is that the subjunctive is no longer the right tense to use. In April US M3, as estimated by the Shadow Government Statistics consultancy, rose by 7.5%, while the annual increase in M3 reached 20.5%. This was the fastest increase in US peacetime history. Federal Reserve data on deposits are already available for the first two weeks of May. The month of May will probably see another M3 advance of 3% – 4%, so that the annual rate of increase moves up to 23% – 24%. The table below shows the latest money growth numbers in the main jurisdictions. A fair comment is that the policy reaction has been most stimulatory (and almost certainly most inflationary) in the USA, less so in the Eurozone, Japan and the UK, and stimulatory only to a small extent in China and India.”
    https://mcusercontent.com/78302034f23041fbbcab0ac6d/files/c1389469-62ad-4d03-bbaf-d4f1ada59772/Monthly_e_mail_2005_Global_money_round_up.pdf

    He does however, say, unless he has changed his mind, that there is going to be a fall in nominal GDP in 2020 {and a dramatic fall in ‘V’}, but also ‘sharp increase’ in ‘inflation’ in the next two or three years.

    [MORE]

    ” . . . let me
    13:04 admit straight away I don’t know exactly
    13:06 what’s going to happen quarterback water
    13:07 it’s very clear that in 2020 there’s
    13:11 going to be a fall in nominal GDP so a
    13:15 dramatic fall also in velocity
    13:19 there’s obviously money growing a kind
    13:21 of 15-20 percent and omelet GDP actually
    13:24 going down a bit but then what happens
    13:26 through in 2021 and 2022 when in all the
    13:30 history these things reassert themselves
    13:32 I didn’t know the precise course
    13:34 quarterly course of inflation
    13:36 GDP and so on all I know is that there’s
    13:38 a very difficult adjustment problem
    13:40 coming up out there in the next few
    13:42 quarters of course at the moment there’s
    13:47 the oil price fall it’s going to dampen
    13:49 down inflation that may lead some
    13:51 complacency you may think that it that
    13:55 the worry is deflation not inflation
    13:56 okay each user in my view there’s a lot
    14:01 of analysis a lot of previous history a
    14:05 lot of theory behind the forecast that
    14:08 there’ll be a sharp increase in American
    14:10 inflation in the next two or three years . . . “

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=0&v=pZhfow6vYsU&feature=emb_logo

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS