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
Imagining An End to Poverty and Economic Dependence
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
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

Guests Michael Hudson & Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove: April 21, 2021 (transcribed May 3, 2021):

Jim Vrettos:
So, Michael, Jonathan. Thank you so very, very much for being here. Jonathan, you’re from… We’re looking at you from North Carolina there and Michael is in Queens. You’ve both had tremendous influence in your respective fields. Spiritual economic activist and so on. What do you make of the contradictory statements in the news, particularly… particularly… Let’s start with the idea of the movement by the Biden administration given parameters of its neoliberal roots. Do you believe that they have the commitment and vision commensurate to Roosevelt’s build of economic whites in 1944 and the attempt to broaden the conception of social justice and democracy [inaudible 00:08:36] In other words, what do you make of the first 100 days or so? Let’s start with Jonathan. Are we moving in the right direction? Which narrative do you think is going to win out here in America? Economic-

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Jim, it’s good to be with you. Thanks for having us. I’m delighted for the chance to engage here with Michael. I come at the question you’re asking from the perspective of the Poor People’s Campaign. For the last three years, we’ve been organizing people across this country who were already in their communities doing grassroots work to raise an alarm about the way that the current economy isn’t working. You mentioned that 140 million people were living in poverty or were low wealth before the pandemic and the pandemic that we’ve experienced for the last year has, in many ways, exposed the fissures in the economy.

We had a huge package under the previous administration, where the vast majority of the investment from the government went to corporations and to banks. The result of that was that we saw the wealthiest people get much wealthier while unemployment on the bottom has stayed very high and the people who earn often less than a living wage are the people who have suffered the most. Incidentally, those are also the people who have been on the front lines and most vulnerable to this coronavirus. All the research that we have now says not only are African Americans three times as likely to get it as their white neighbors, but poor people are three times as likely to contract as their wealthier neighbors. And so, in many ways, I think this world altering experience that we’ve all lived through has exposed the lies of the neoliberal system and the way in which we’ve gone on believing for far too long. That if the economy is doing well, the people are doing well. Well, that’s just not true.

And so I think the Biden administration has successfully passed one piece of legislation that, at the very least, did put more of the investment in the hands of people at the bottom of the economy. And so I’ll give him credit for that. But that’s only temporary and it’s only confined to COVID relief. Frankly, we need to reimagine the whole economy. Because the Poor People’s Campaign has been saying and saying clearly, in the words of the people who experience it directly and with the support of evidence from economists and sociologists who we’ve worked closely with, that when we lift the bottom, that’s when everybody can rise. And so we need economic investment that is designed to lift from the bottom. I hope and pray we can push this administration towards more of that.

I would say, just in terms of your question about how it compares to FDR, that FDR was no radical, but there was a movement that pushed him. Part of that movement was very faith-based. Frances Perkins was a product of the Social Gospel movement. She came up in Chicago, when she was getting educated, watching the settlement houses and those great Black churches of the Black social gospel in Chicago that were committed to the message of Jesus. The good news to the poor. She was determined to implement that through the Roosevelt administration. Now, they didn’t get anywhere near everything they were trying to get, but nevertheless, we did hammer out some very real universal policies that guaranteed the basic necessities of life. Things like Social Security. That’s an, I think, incredibly important piece of our history that is widely accepted and appreciated now, but when it was proposed, it was called radical. It was called Marxist. It was called all the things that these ideas get called now. So, I think it’s important to remember that history as we push together for economic activity that lifts from the bottom.

Jim Vrettos:
Great. Michael, do you want to comment on what Jonathan just said there?


Michael Hudson:
I agree with everything Jonathan has said. I think he’s put it very clearly. One comment I had… He talks about the good thing that the Biden administration has done is provide relief for the poor, but this relief went right through their hands. The vast majority of the relief was not a stimulus. It was a relief, as he pointed out, and it’s temporary. Most of this money was simply paid to the banks and to the landlords. It was paid for the rent arrears, especially by people who were unemployed and it was paid to write down credit card debt. In many cases, the relief was paid directly into the bank accounts or the other accounts of the poor. The poorest people didn’t get any of the relief because they don’t have bank accounts and they don’t have addresses because they’re already joining the homeless. Here in New York. Of course, the problem is that there’s going to be a huge wave of homelessness when the freeze on evictions of families behind in their rent expires. Landlords have already begun to illegally evict many of people who’ve been unable to pay their rents. They don’t have enough money to draw on their bank accounts to do this. So, that is very unfortunate.

Jonathan mentioned Frances Perkins and the gospel. The word gospel meant, literally, the good news, but wherever it was used in the Bible, as Sharon Ringe, a Lutheran historian has pointed out, it always was used as a code word for the Jubilee year. For the clean slate. The only way that you can really liberate the people who’ve been pushed way behind the eight ball by the virus is to say, okay, the economy is taking a pause. You don’t have to pay the rents that have accrued when you’re unable to do that. You don’t have to pay the debts that have accrued when you’re unable to do this. Because, otherwise, there’s not going to be a recovery. How on earth can you recover if most of the people have to now, all of a sudden, pay up all the arrears that they’ve been accumulating during the pandemic and, not to mention that, long before? It can’t be done.

The other comment I have… Jonathan said the economy hasn’t been working. What has been a bonanza for the five percent! And even more of a bonanza for the one percent. The top one percent of the population has made more money since the pandemic began… as much money as than they made since 1980. Economic crises are always a bonanza for the wealthy because they get to profit from the distress of others. What you call distress is for them a wonderful marketing opportunity. Wall Street has been incorporating all sorts of private capital funds to make a killing once the arrears come due. They’re planning on residential property at a discount as they did after 2008. Buying commercial property at a discount. They’re looking to make a killing, which is what usually happens in the aftermath of a crisis. So, the Biden administration has given a palliative. The palliative has helped mainly the creditors and the landlords so far with not much being used by the people and the economic activity that’s picked up is mainly by people who can afford it, which is not the constituency that Jonathan and I are talking about.

Jim Vrettos:
Right. Jonathan. Jonathan, are you and Rev. Barber talking about the Jubilee? What is your position?

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
We are preachers, so we have to talk about it. It’s in our authoritative text. If you follow Jesus, of course, the first sermon Jesus preaches at Nazareth is straight from the prophet Isaiah. The spirit of the Lord is on me, he says, to proclaim that word gospel. But it’s gospel [inaudible 00:17:46] to the poor. Recovery of sight to the blind. Release to the captives. The year of Jubilee! That’s Luke 4. Jesus quoting the Jubilee passage from Isaiah. This is very much what we understand to be the good news that is needed over and against all the problems of the economy that Michael was just describing. So, yes, debt cancellation. Debt forgiveness, which is central to the Jubilee theme in scripture. I absolutely agree. It’s the way out and it is justice. Because canceling debts that were created by unjust systems is not giving someone a free pass after they goofed off. It’s simply doing justice where injustice has been done. That’s why Jesus said that it was necessary then and why it’s still necessary now.

Michael Hudson:
Even in a just system, people fall into debt. Often for no problem of their own. They would get sick. I’m so glad that you emphasized Jesus’ first sermon because I’ve had a number of presentations, and that’s what we’ve been emphasizing. That’s a path… You’d think that his first sermon would have been the center of a lot of the evangelist religions, but your group and my Harvard group are about the only people really emphasizing that that was the key. Of course, when Luke describes that passage, Luke comments that a lot of the people didn’t like it. They got very angry. Especially the Pharisees, who loved money. That’s really the problem that you’re doing. There’s a difference of approach today and the approach that you and I are taking is not really being backed by much of the middle class that says, well, we want to get rich off our savings and debt. There’s really a conflict there that goes much deeper than just what to do about the pandemic.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
You’re absolutely right. What I have been trying to teach in churches and wrote about in Revolution of Values is the way that this has been framed for Christians in a way that really isn’t designed to help people understand it. The distortion of the Christian message, in particular about the economy, is really some 80 years in the making and it has everything to do with the way in which corporations were scared to death by the activism of Christians in the Social Gospel movement. Kevin Kruse has written this history in his book One Nation Under God, which I would encourage people to read.


But if you go back and look closely, after the Great Depression, there wasn’t a lot of confidence in corporate leadership. So, the Chamber of Commerce got together and they literally hired a preacher. They had done a survey that said preachers were some of the most trusted people in the country. They hired a man named James Fifield and he started an organization called Spiritual Mobilization and he recruited tens of thousands of pastors across the United States to preach what Kevin Kruse calls Christian libertarianism. Essentially, that Jesus endorsed the free market economy and that to be Christian is to be a libertarian. That got pushed very hard over and against the social gospel, over and against what FDR’s administration had tried to implement, and was their strategy for how to push back against the New Deal. Not simply do it politically, but do it by tying it to people’s faith.

And then, of course, after the civil rights movement, that gets tied together with those people who came in and formed the religious right and said that the way to push back against the civil rights movement is not as the segregationists did in the South but rather to do it in the name of morality, in the name of traditional values, in the name of faith. All of that fuses together and creates avenues and a whole wraparound culture of radio shows, books, Christian television, para church organizations, political organizations, that reinforce a message over and over again that to be Christian is to be a reactionary right-wing libertarian. Believe that the economy has the final word. It says, “in God we trust,” on the money, which means for most people that we trust the money to be how God is working in the world. People have easily bought the lie that, if you have money, God has blessed you, if you don’t have money, it’s because you haven’t been true to God. It blames the poor. It uses these lies to justify a system that is set up to benefit the very elite and it’s produced what we are now talking about in the public square as Christian nationalism. But I think people don’t realize that this has been around for a long time and there’s a whole culture that supports it.

Michael Hudson:
A long time. What we’re doing is fighting the same fight today that Jesus fought against his opponents 2000 years ago. It’s exactly the same fight. The people who claim to be the Christian right were the people who were fighting Jesus and spent the next three centuries fighting him.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Yes indeed. You’ve studied your scriptures. That’s how I read it too, brother.

Jim Vrettos:
And you’re not doing the poor any good by having government helping through various programs, correct? Government becomes the enemy.

Michael Hudson:
But it tries to pose as the friend. What Biden wanted to do was use the poor as a vehicle to give money to his constituency, the campaign donors. The landlords and the financial interests and the neoliberals who Jonathan’s mentioned. That’s really his constituency. How can you expect them to do really much help when you look at where their constituency is? They mastered the rhetoric. They read 1984 and they know what double think is and double speak. That’s the problem that we’re in. That people are confused as to what is really the issue and what’s going to really get us out of the mess we’re in. And we really are in a mess. It’s not going to be an economic recovery except for the top layer. That’s what all the economists that I know are saying. How do you explain how the economies got down and down in the last year and the stock market has gone way, way up?

The government has created, I think, 10 trillion, 12 trillion dollars, but it’s all been to buy stocks and bonds. They could’ve paid off everybody’s mortgage. They could’ve made America a low-cost economy. But all the amount of money has been added to the stock and bond market. Not to the housing market. Not to the income of the poor. Not to raise the minimum wage. The Democrats were overjoyed when the Senate lady said, “If you raise the minimum wage that doesn’t have anything to do with taxation.” Well, of course, it does. Because, right now, one of the tax burdens on America is paying the wages of people who work at Walmart and paying the wages of people who work at other exploitative companies for low wage. Companies can afford to pay a very low wage and the workers get a subsidy from the government to the wage. Essentially, if you would raise the minimum wage, you’d cut the budget. You’d provide the government with more money after not having to bail out the worst exploiters that pay the low wage. Not a word from the Democrats on that. Not a word to push it.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Oh, this is what we’ve been trying to tell Brother Joe Manchin in West Virginia. We’ve met with him. The campaign is led by people in West Virginia… very adamant on this point. When anybody says they don’t believe in welfare, it’s just not true. They do believe in welfare. They’re paying welfare to these corporations. This is government-sponsored corporate support that’s allowing them to keep going by paying their people so much less than a living wage.

Jim Vrettos:
How does reparations figure into our discussion here?

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Well, the reparations conversation goes all the way back to the end of the Civil War. I think people are fairly familiar with the phrase 40 acres and a mule. That was the field directive that came out of the southern theater. When Sherman took the plantations on the east coast of Georgia, what the union troops said to the African Americans who had been enslaved on those lands is that you can have a plot, 40 acres and a mule. You can work this land. This land will be your economic base in order to survive as free people in the United States. And that was the plan. Until, of course, Lincoln was assassinated.


Andrew Johnson, his Southern vice president, his Democratic vice president, at the time in the way the parties were aligned, becomes in charge. He pardons the seditious leader. I think most people have forgotten this. Jefferson Davis led a rebellion against this country. They threw him in the jail cell at Fort Monroe and he only stayed a few months, until Johnson was president, and then he pardoned him and he went home to his plantation. I mean, we’re still talking about what we’re going to do with the insurrectionists from January 6th. Well, let’s remember. We didn’t do a very good job of having any real justice after there was an insurrection during the Civil War. But at any rate, when Johnson is then in charge of implementing the beginnings of Reconstruction, he does such a bad job that he completely obliterates the plan for reparations. That’s why, of course, Congress has to take over and we get congressional Reconstruction that did press forward some things like the 13th, 14th, and 25th Amendments, but nevertheless, never addresses this issue of reparations.

The basic question is… Anybody who’s played Monopoly at home knows that if you get eight rounds into the game and then somebody wants to come and play, they’re never going to catch up with everybody else. How do people who were enslaved and were considered property for 250 years all of a sudden become full citizens and part of a society and an economy without any resources? There has to be some reparation for that injustice. That has never happened and that is the root of the economic disparities… the racialized economic disparities… that continue to exist in this country. And so the conversation that we’re having now about reparations is simply a question about what can we do at this point to address that mistake that was made after the Civil War that has never been corrected for? And that we still playing out in disparities not just in… Now, it’s not only in the economic disparities, but it’s in the health disparities, the education disparities… I mean, you can go all down the list. It’s the result of that basic economic divide.

Jim Vrettos:
Michael, you’ve done a lot of writing about this. Tell us.

Michael Hudson:
Status starts really with land and with real estate. Because much of the discussion of reparations is described by anti-reparations people as, well, it’s all reparations for slavery, and slavery doesn’t exist anymore. What are you going to do? But you’re absolutely right. The reparations that are paid for has been excluding the blacks, really, from real estate. That’s gone right down to today. It was part of Roosevelt. Roosevelt’s providing government mortgage guarantees for the middle class didn’t extend to Black people. All of the growth of the white middle class wealth in this United States consists of homeowner that you can trace back to whole takeoff we’ve had since 1945. Most of the middle class wealth that’s handed down to their children has been a result of the fact that they could get real estate. They could get loans for real estate and all the benefits that have come from multiplying 100 times in value whereas the blacks don’t. That’s why all of the Federal Reserve statistics on net worth between blacks and the rest of the population. The blacks have almost nothing, because the net worth on the white side of the balance sheet is mainly real estate.

So, what would you do to make reparations? Well, you’re not going to just say, well, gee, the average house is \$500000. Let’s give everyone \$500000. In my mind, what you would do to make reparations equitable would be to give every Black family a home – and that requires every poor family, whites and Hispanics as well as Blacks. You can’t be racist and only give it to one group and not to another. Give every family the same offer that was made to the white middle class in 1945. I worked for the Savings Banks’ central bank for many years, doing statistics on home buying. When I came to New York and began working on Wall Street in the 1960s, any family could get a loan to buy a house. The limit was the mortgage could not take more than 25% of the income and the mortgage they were given, at the current interest rate, would be self-amortizing to pay off the entire mortgage and give them home ownership in 30 years. It would be self-amortizing mortgage as a result of one quarter of their income.

Well, suppose you were to give this today. I think the government should provide housing… not public housing, but real housing. A house of your own, which is the modern equivalent to 40 acres and a mule because people live in cities now. They’re not going to go back to the country. Suppose someone is making a minimum wage salary. Suppose they’re only making \$20000 a year. Okay, you will take \$20000 a year. They will give them a home. A nice two-story, three-story home with a yard and everything. They’ll have to pay for that over 30 years. What will they pay? They will pay \$5000 per year and at the end… three and a half percent, four percent interest rate, which was what was charged back in the ’50s and ’60s. At the end of the 30 years, this \$5000 will give them a home. It works out to about \$168000 including the accumulated interest charge. The interest usually ends up amounting to more than the home purchase price.

But that would be… If you were to give the poor the same deal that the white middle class was offered in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, that would give them the same foundation that the middle class has. Because the characteristic of the middle class is home ownership. All of this has been reversed since 2008. President Obama’s eviction of 10 million families in order to support his donor class, the banks, has lowered owner occupancy rates in this country by about 10%. Home ownership is going to be plunging even more as a result of the pandemic and the foreclosures that are all being filed and waiting to be executed by the banks and the landlords. If you don’t have this reversal, if you don’t offer people the same guarantee of self support homes, then you’re going to have a wipe out.


Part of the Jubilee year was not only the canceling of debts. It was the return of the lands that they had lost. What you’re doing in this case is returning the lands to the people who had lost them by the frauds that occurred in the Democratic and Ku Klux Klan fight back against the settlement of the Civil War. And the frauds that are occurring right down to today. I had a home in the Lower East Side of Manhattan. I’d bought it for one dollar down in 1967 and I wanted to finance it in 1980. I asked Chase to come out. They sent out an appraiser and he kept saying, “We’re not going to loan here. Only Black people live in this neighborhood.” He used another word for blacks. I made a complaint to the commission in New York. Nothing ever came of it. So, I lived in a redlined neighborhood. I ended up selling the house and moving down to Tribeca, but the redlining continued right into the ’80s, ’90s, right down to today. Without realizing that this stripping away of property and preventing the poor people from ever being able to work their way out of that to actually get decent loans, to get an affordable house that… If you don’t solve that problem, then the economy is going to polarize at an accelerating rate and you’re certainly not going to have a recovery.

Jim Vrettos:
What do you think, Jonathan?

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
All true. He’s absolutely right. The only thing I would add from a Southern perspective is that one of the things you know if you live in the South is that, through those years you were describing, when so many white families were building wealth and so many African Americans were excluded from that, there were nevertheless… despite the systemic barriers, there were Black folks who built wealth in Black communities across the South. In the 1970s, those communities were obliterated by urban renewal. The people who did invest and were able to build wealth to pass on to their families saw that wealth decimated by the building of highways and airports and everything else that white folks were in charge of planning. When they made the choices about where it was going to happen, they placed all of those infrastructure pieces in places where it didn’t hurt the value of their property but it hurt the value of property that Black folks did own. So, the injustice of the system has continued alongside the refusal to give reparations.

I think of the demands of the Poor People’s Campaign as very much a holistic set of demands addressed at reparations. Something along the lines of what you’re saying in terms of housing. Universal access to affordable housing is a demand of the campaign, but I think that has to go alongside a demand that people have access to healthcare. A demand that people have access to a fully-funded and diverse public education for their children so that there’s hope of a future generation that can also enjoy life here. And we keep insisting that living wages have to be a part of this. I mean, being able to afford your housing is one thing, but so many people can’t afford to eat. It’s incredibly important that people who work more than full-time in so many cases don’t have enough to pay their bills. And so we really do need a holistic approach to a policy agenda that says we’re going to lift from the bottom and we’re going to remake this economy in a way that it can work for most people. Because, like you said, it’s working for some people, but it ain’t working for most of us.

Michael Hudson:
What you described in the South is very much like the American treaties with the Native Americans. Sent them out west to where nobody wanted and then imagine what happened when all of a sudden they found oil under the land. Well, all of a sudden, they tried to kick them off and you had the Koch brothers’ fortunes come from working with the Bureau of Indian Affairs to kick off the Indians, to strip away their rights, and to take the oil rights for the Koch brothers, basically. So, just like they were kicked off their lands, the Southerners found… Black people found their lands paved over for the airports and what you mentioned. They tried to do that in New York. Robert Moses tried to drive a highway right through [Rome 00:40:40] Street and Lower Manhattan and the Village and that was James Jacobs’ whole fight was. The white middle class was able to stop it. They were all for it in the South. That’s exactly the problem there.

Jim Vrettos:
What I hear you all saying is we’re up against a neoliberal philosophy that we’ll give to a certain extent, correct? But when we’re talking about the sorts of structural changes… economic, political, racial, and so on… will only go so far. Am I reading that wrong? Or the hope is with the Poor People’s Campaign somehow that can convince this… the Biden administration and neoliberal roots to go further than it wants… No. You’re shaking your head already.

Michael Hudson:
We’re talking about human rights. Not just poor people’s rights. We’re talking about human rights. Everyone has the right to medical care. They’re not giving that in America. I must say it’s largely because of Black leadership has fought against human rights for medical care. They’re on the right wing of the Democratic spectrum. Look at the presidential election when Clyburn threw all of the support against Bernie Sanders and in favor of Biden. I’m sorry to say that the Black leadership has not been progressive when it comes to either a living wage or education or public health or any of the things that we consider human rights.

Now, obviously, the reason that Jonathan is talking about the Poor People’s Campaign is they’re the most deprived of the human rights. But the only way of phrasing this in a way that is universal is to put them in human rights. Neoliberals are against it and the fact is the middle class… the politicians are not going to be leading in this. They’re going to try to jump in front of the parade when they see it’s successful, but they’re going to hold the parade back and say not now, wait, or compromise. Let’s do it in stages. Let’s stretch it out over 10 years so that the next incoming administration can roll back anything that [inaudible 00:43:12]. It has to be done [inaudible 00:43:14] with a principled position. Biden and the Democrats or whoever have a principled position for human rights because they’re against them.


Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
What we believe in the campaign is that the only alternative to that sort of neoliberal compromise is moral fusion organizing. We have to build a coalition of Black, White, Brown, Native, Asian together that does demand that these things be human rights and that whoever is in office has to face that demand and face real political consequences, which means in the present moment we have to… In order to pursue this agenda, we have to be equally committed to fighting for voting rights. Because it’s very clear that the organizations of the reactionary right are working in statehouses to push back against these growing coalitions. I mean, we did see some real progress in terms of turnout in the last year and a lot of that was because poor people across various racial groups came together and said we do want a new kind of leadership.

In Kentucky, they were saying, “We want it from the hood to the holler.” I think that’s a good call for the whole country. Often, we think about rural as white and urban as Black, but this was interracial infusion. From the hood to the holler, we have common interests. We need to come together. We need to vote together. The response to that has been an attempt to roll back voting rights and to abridge the right to vote. The very thing that is prohibited by the 15th Amendment. And so, as a campaign, as we continue to push this agenda and to push the current administration as far as we can, we’re also absolutely clear that, in terms of the next election cycle and pushing candidates who are willing to embrace more of this agenda, we’ve got to have voting rights and an expansion of federal voting rights protections. And so I think that’s a critical piece that we’re working on this year.

Michael Hudson:
Well, the fusion you’re talking about of course is why Martin Luther King was killed and why even Malcolm X after him was killed. The Democrats’ response to voting rights was, okay, we’ll give you a choice between yes please and yes thank you. If you have the Democratic Committee making sure that no leftie, no social Democrat, can qualify, and if they pull the tricks that they did for the last two elections against Bernie Sanders and against other left-wingers, if they give all the funding to the right-wingers, if they act, really, just like they did act in the Civil War, where are you going to get? That’s the whole problem. You want people to be able to vote for something besides a choice between right-wing Democrats and right-wing Republicans and that’s not… Both political parties are organized in a way to prevent that.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
I agree. I think that’s true and that the kind of organizing that is bringing together a new and a broader voting coalition has strengthened the progressive caucus in the Congress and is creating the possibility for a political position that embraces these sort of ideas. That’s the direction we’re going to keep pushing in. And I think building power to do it is the work of our day.

Jim Vrettos:
I was going to ask. So, the progressive caucus. Give us some individuals that would be an example of what you’re talking about in terms of fusion politics.

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Well, I think of somebody like Pramila Jayapal. She’s leading the caucus right now. She was from Seattle and worked to pass a living wage there in local politics and then was elected to the Congress and has really seen that caucus grow in her time in the Congress. But I think this can’t be about party. It’s got to be about transforming the system. That means it has to be a grassroots movement that really pushes whoever’s there towards these ideas and these policies.

Michael Hudson:
That’s exactly what the military theorist von Clausewitz said. He said don’t go to war without having an idea of what you want to accomplish. What’s the situation that you want to achieve? You begin from saying the end and then you work back how are we going to get there? Your group has defined the ends. Exactly what I would do is not merely having money in your pocket. It’s having the human rights. The education, the homes of their own, the real estate, the minimum wage. That really is the key. There’s no party as such that’s supporting that and to the extent that you succeed with the progressive caucus in getting your members elected, every reaction is going have an equal and opposite reaction and you’re going to face sabotage, as you know. You have to really throw down the gauntlet and let people know this is not a marginal talk we’re talking about. This is basic and goes right to the core.

Jim Vrettos:
This is serious stuff. Yeah. Well, listen. We only have a minute to go. Why don’t we… Why don’t both of you let our audience know how they can reach you? How they can contact you. Jonathan, you want to…?

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Well, if you want to get in touch with me, I write books and I have a website that’s just my name. You can find me there. But I really want people to connect with the Poor People’s Campaign wherever they are. Please go to and learn about what the Poor People’s Campaign is doing and what organizations are already part of the coalition there where you are.

Michael Hudson:
My work is on the general economy and on economic history. is where I have all of my lectures and my articles. I’m working mainly with the Chinese now on coping with their problems, especially real estate problems and I’m still working on my antiquity articles.

Jim Vrettos:
Thank you both so very, very much. This was really, really interesting and riveting. As we struggle still to create the Jubilee and the blessed community, social justice, and a moral economic system. Thank you again so very, very much. It’s really been great and enlightening. We’ll see you-

Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove:
Thank you again. Good to be with you, Michael. Take care.

Michael Hudson:
Thank you.

Jim Vrettos:
All the best. Again, this is Jim Vrettos. Thank you so very, very much for watching us here on The Radical Imagination. We’ll see you again next week on The Radical Imagination.

(Republished from The Radical Imagination by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Economics • Tags: Banks, Debt, Joe Biden, Poverty, Wall Street 
Hide 52 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Rubicon says:

    Jonathan states, “All the research that we have now says not only are African Americans three times as likely to get it as their white neighbors, but poor people are three times as likely to contract as their wealthier neighbors.”

    My friends have been reading authentic studies, by principled specialists in the fields of virology, immunology, medicine, and chemistry for several months.
    To date, we have found NO evidence that Black people are more vulnerable than white folks to this virus. None.
    Instead, social scientists have been chronicling a number of times in reveakubg that Black folks are the least likely willing to be vaccinated, injected for Covid.

    Why is that – because the US military, in the past, have used Black people as guinea pigs with various nefarious, experimental injections on them. In America, the Black population has passed that knowledge from each succeeding generation……….hence, they are the most leery population in the US to being injected.

  2. bayviking says:

    Michael Hudson is America’s finest living economist. This fact is recognized by many countries around the world who hire him in times of crisis. But he is all but locked out of FC, except for Sanders and other progressives.

    It is good to see him here.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  3. I had to skip the video, it sounded like a intro to a Zulu Warrior summit dance where you dressed in leopard skins and elephant shoes.
    Who hires or buys this canned pos called music?

  4. Hudson, if you’re going to preach about this world, please direct your narrative accordingly. Faith in what ? Slimey bullshit artists who tell us the God’s “forgiveness” is not an unworldly power but actually “a code word for the Jubilee year” and that despite God’s prohibition of usury and “owe no man anything” we should nevertheless perpetuate an evil usury system by encouraging its victims?

    Hudson’s preachers also conveniently omit how under the Jubilee system, the closer it became, the less anyone wanted to lend, knowing a default would soon be made unenforceable. Scam artists came out of the woodwork when a Jubilee loomed. But things like that wouldn’t happen nowadays, because these preachers tell us that by forgiving a junkie–you cure him. Hallelujah, I’ma woke believer!

    Forgiveness means letting a thing go because it’s not worth having. But woah, let’s not forsake the dope, let’s just forgive the junkie’s debt. Am simply shocked to hear these feel good artist preachers can accept and ignore the evil of this world to the extent it does not directly affect them–same as all libertarian scum.

    wait . . . they forgot to tell us how Jesus is gonna rapture us into the clouds if you simply believe in lies, but John Hagee prolly does a better jew-proof version of that one.

    “The poor you will always have with you”– God.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  5. IronForge says:

    Economics and “Imaginary Jesus” Tunnel Vision.

    I respect his Economic Theses Historical Analyses, and Viewpoints; but Jesus-never-existed-dot-com.

    He lumps Center-Right Christian Social/Moral Conservatives with the “Mises-Monetarists-Rentier-Banker” Crowd who, he suspects, would “oppose” the “Imaginary Jesus” had they both lived in the same period.

    The “Imaginary Jesus” is a 4thCE fabricated figure made for the Perennially Rejected Chrestus Cult to carry on as Constantine’s Follower Cult.

    That Imaginary Jesus opposed the alleged Profit-Making at the Temples, and the Storytellers wrote on with a Comment regarding State-Economies-Taxation with verse “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” – what are Caesar’s(Coinage) belong to Caesar(‘s Economic System).

    The Jubilee System was allegedly carried on by the Jewish Autonomous Kingdom of Judea.
    To what extent? I don’t know.
    How were the Jubilee Implemented amongst and by the Jewish – After the 70CE Sacking of Jerusalem?

    The “Mises-Monetarists-Rentier-Banker” Crowd stand on their own.

  6. GMC says:

    So many ideas in order to help get the USA back to the old USA, but Washington, the Fed, the MIC, , Dept of Commerce, Zionists, Globalists, etc. have divorced the Domestic USA for decades. The loss of industry and the game to force out small farmers, for Corporate ones are just two examples. “It’s your own fault, that you didn’t make it big in America” – the well off people say ! The US / One World Order is making more money from under the International table , than in taxes from the workers, while corporations pay less than the solid well paid worker { per centage wise}. That under the table money stays – under the table , until some military or alphabet agency needs it. It a huge uphill battle and Battle is the key word. There is sooo much wrong , so many political and social obstacles, that were actually planned to make Domestic America fail.But it won’t fail in the Media – things will be blamed on this person or that country – you can bet on that.

    • Replies: @Biff
  7. WW2, subsequent destruction of capitalistic competition overseas by that war, all the money made from that war and subsequent system built for USA benefit to siphone the rest of the world wealth to USA was the real reason of temporary in historic terms rise of majority of Americans rise of well being.

    Once things started getting to more normal USA elites became unwilling to share with the rest even whatever small part of created wealth and they came up with interesting concept that the bigger part of the cake few party goers eat, the more would be left for the rest.

    Example of how to rise all people well being without input from outside and based upon only resources available exists. It was called USSR.

    USA has no way to rise well being for the poorest like it was done in 20 the century because underlying conditions had changed. The only r sources left is what parasitic 1% accumulated over all those decades, but there should be right way to do that and it is not capitalistic way.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  8. onebornfree says: • Website

    “Imagining An End to Poverty and Economic Dependence”

    Despite the fact that government “solutions” too anything never work, and always make things even worse than they already were [which was a direct result of prior government interfering “solutions”], and always will make things even worse, [ the current fake pandemic being an excellent example], the usual “experts”/clowns predictable, imagined “solution” to “poverty and economic dependence” [and all other perceived social problems] is, as always, tah-dah!:

    Mo’ gubmint, mo’ gubmint , mo’ gubmint!

    “You _know_ it makes sense”, right?

    And so it goes… 🙄

    “Regards” onebornfree

    See: “Why Government Doesn’t Work “:

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  9. Step 1: Reduce the world population to 100 million

    Step 2: Make sure those 100 million are high IQ and beautiful ubermensch via eugenics and genetic engineering.

    Step 3: Embrace maximum automation, green energy, biotechnoly and nanotechnology.

    Step 4: Every single person lives like a lord with thousands of acres of land, free to pursue knowledge, culture, art and love while menial labor is done by armies of machines.

    Step 5: Enjoy

    • Replies: @Ed Case
  10. BS, all of it BS. I couldn’t sit through the whole thing. Politicians and their co-criminals lying, lying, lying.

  11. xyzxy says:

    …reparations that are paid for has been excluding the blacks

    …and that requires every poor family, whites and Hispanics as well as Blacks.

    As hard as they try, the editors still can’t get with the new spelling rules consistently. Got to make sure black is big B caps. Otherwise, we are committing another micro-aggression against our saintly people of color. LOL

    And while Hudson’s at it, ‘people’ have not been ‘pushed behind the eight ball’ by ‘the virus’. It’s the flu, Mike. If people have been pushed around it’s because it’s a plan of political control and dehumanization, using the ‘pandemic’ as an excuse.

    And finally, you could give every ghetto black a ‘free’ half million dollar house in a nice neighborhood and in a few years it would be just like any other crime infested slum project.

    Sometimes I think economists (and definitely preachers) are so theoretical they have no grasp of real world reality. Spiritual Economic Activist? You can’t make this stuff up!

    • Replies: @Marckus
  12. Thank you for transcribing your podcast. Wish everyone would do so for those of us with slow motion internet. Now for my take. There will always be poor people. Blame IQ or human diversity or a bad birth or an extra chromosome. We are not equal. The assumption you can end poverty is predicated on silly notion of equality. You can indeed help it like no wars, no carry over interest, no usury, no deep state, and no income tax. Also the less professionals the better. It would go a far way, since they are inflated value added penalty tax. Unfortunately your prescription would mean more blood sucking vampires with advanced degrees. Finally Jesus never railed against the Romans or Greeks. He wasn’t really against the systems of rule, just his fellow brethren and their loan systems operating out of the temples. .

  13. Biff says:

    Nice work!

    • Replies: @GMC
  14. Q: What do you get when a sociologist, a preacher and an economist get together?

    A: Almost an hour long bullshit session where they want more gov’t programs that in the long run cause more harm than good.

    All three of these characters “professions” shouldn’t exist.

    • Agree: Realist
    • LOL: GMC
  15. TG says:

    I agree with so much of what is here, and yet there is one major omission that by itself will cancel out all else. And that is demographics.

    It is the Iron Law of Development that FIRST people stop having the maximum number of children they physically can, and THEN – if everything else talked about here goes about half right – they can slowly accumulate per-capita wealth.

    The idea of the ‘demographic transition,’ where first people get rich then start having fewer children, is a lie. Unless there is an open frontier, that basically never happens. Because the ability of exponential population growth to absorb all resources is an absolute veto power over prosperity.

    One notes that above all else, the rich demand the right to force population growth, it is the one thing that they will not tolerate any dissent on. If people don’t have ‘enough’ children to satisfy the rich, they must be persuaded to, and failing that, they must be replaced with the surplus population of places where people will.

    Ignore this and nothing you do about debt or finance etc. will matter. Certainly, it never has.

  16. Marckus says:

    Damn right ! A truly insightful comment. If in addition to the house you also gave him a million dollars cash he would also be broke in a short while. I’ll bet the \$27M settlement Floyd’s family got is already blown or by the end of the year will all be gone.

    Economist and preacher fucks do have a grasp of reality ie reality for them and theories for the disenfranchised. I have yet to meet a poor preacher and economists seem to live a rather good life while idiots fumble around translating their bullshit.

    You are right. No one can make this shit up.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  17. Marckus says:

    “Imagining an end to poverty and economic dependence”…….means……………

    >An end to poverty and economic dependence for the good Fathers and Shepherds of the flock.
    >An end to poverty and economic dependence for Economists and academic quacks

    In both cases their disciples listen to and follow their shit and end up in a quagmire surrounded by dangerous reptiles while the soap box pimps, both of them preachers in words and method, roar by in their air boats.

    Anyone who listens to these fools and follows their bunk has to be a complete idiot.

  18. Mefobills says:

    Mo’ gubmint, mo’ gubmint , mo’ gubmint!

    “You _know_ it makes sense”, right?

    One-born free-dumb strikes again! It was never a mo-gubmint, mo-gubmint argument. It is a right-sized government formed with non-psychopaths, operating a mixed economy.

    Your Mises BS ideology is for people with two digit IQ’s, who are easily swayed with simple platitudes.

    The world is not simple. What Lolbertarians and Mises actually do is foreclose the mind, and then direct simpletons down avenues of bad thought. That then leaves out-of-account a right sized government with the capability to stop rentiers and usurers.

    In other words, you are a disinfo agent at the worst, and a useful dupe at the best. I’m thinking dupe, because you cannot learn.

    The vast sweep of economic history shows Oligarchy and self-interested types trying to aggrandize themselves to power at the expense of the general welfare. Lolbertarianism is silent on this dominant mode of human behavior in economic history. The silence is deafening.

    • Agree: Biff
    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @onebornfree
  19. nsa says:

    The learned professor proposes everyone with a poverty income (his stated \$20k/annum) be given a “nice two-story or three story home with a yard and everything” (what, no swimming pool or tennis court or low bank waterfront?) valued at his suggested \$500k for the princely sum of \$5k per year for 30 years (his number \$168k total but much less if inflation is factored in). So let’s do the math. Say there are 100 million aggrieved citizens who qualify for this new inspired program, requiring the taxpayer to chip in a minimum of \$500k – \$168k = \$332k each. 100 million domiciles x \$332 thousand each = \$33,200 billion i.e. \$33.2 trillion. Total nominal annual US GDP is about \$21 trillion. This foolishness verifies the old saw that some ideas are so stupid only a college professor or a cleric could believe them.

    • Agree: ruralguy
    • Thanks: Peripatetic Itch
    • Replies: @frontier
    , @RadicalCenter
  20. To end poverty, the zionist central banks and the zionist IRS must be abolished, they are unconstitutional and a plague on the American people and have been used to finance the zionist perpetrated wars that America has been thrust into by the zionist global kabal and have cost America Lives and blood and money and all of this for the zionist banking kabal.

    Zionist central bankers are behind the covid-19 scam, fraud and psyop and covid-19 which does not exist, it has never been isolated, is the biggest scam and psyop in the history of the world and the genocide vaccines , which are not vaccines but are an operating platform to alter the DNA and destroy the immune system and cause destruction of health and in most cases death, and only the zionist central bankers could roll out this genocide agenda world wide.

    Zionists are wreckers and destroyers of nations and humanity, it is what they do, it is in their DNA.

    The real terrorists wear suits and operate out of Washington DC and Tel Aviv and London.

  21. GMC says:

    You know where I spent most of my adult life , so it was quite a shock when I went to the lower 48 for my first job there in 33 years – in 06 . I never ever thought politics or gave a shit about them , until I saw the Abortion , that happened to the good old USA. And the people around me in the US that I talked to about it, had No idea what i was talking about – no shit . I retired and figured a pro longed bucket list , was the best way out – of both places I had lived in North America. Plus here – it only costs 400 bucks to bury my sorry ass – when the time comes – lol – Pravda. Spacibo B

  22. HT says:

    Eliminating poverty would involve removing from society the vast majority of non-whites especially the Negro. There is a reason extreme poverty is the norm in non-white and especially Negro countries and there is no magic dirt here that will ever change that.

  23. @Mefobills

    There’s no such thing as a right sized government. Every government grows to consume as much as possible because the process of gov’t attracts the sociopaths / psychopaths in the society. The very idea that the gov’t should operate the economy is asinine in the extreme because that means they pick winners and losers which is the case in the US today.

    If there must be gov’t, then it should be as small as possible to cause as little damage as possible. The libertarian thinkers just want less redistribution and more self sufficiency. Is that really such a bad idea?

    • Thanks: Mark G.
    • Replies: @onebornfree
  24. onebornfree says: • Website

    It was never a mo-gubmint, mo-gubmint argument. It is a right-sized government formed with non-psychopaths, operating a mixed economy.”

    “The kind of man who wants the government to adopt and enforce his ideas is always the kind of man whose ideas are idiotic” H.L.Mencken

    “Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure” Robert LeFevere

    “Taking the State wherever found, striking into its history at any point, one sees no way to differentiate the activities of its founders, administrators and beneficiaries from those of a professional-criminal class.” Albert J. Nock

    “Because they are all ultimately funded via both direct and indirect theft [taxes], and counterfeiting [central bank monopolies], all governments are essentially, at their very cores, 100% corrupt criminal scams which cannot be “reformed”or “improved”,simply because of their innate criminal nature.” onebornfree

    And so I say : “Mo’ gubmint, mo’ gubmint, mo’gubmint! 🤣

    “Regards” onebornfree

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  25. onebornfree says: • Website

    There’s no such thing as a right sized government. Every government grows to consume as much as possible because the process of gov’t attracts the sociopaths / psychopaths in the society. “

    Most people, including the author of the article, do not understand the true , unchangeable, wholly criminal nature of any/all governments, let alone exactly why they are unalterably so , regardless of who runs them.

    They prefer to live in a fantasy world where government can do “good”, as long as the “right” people are in it, and it is the “right” size.

    Any “in yer face” obvious evidence of the criminal nature of a “true believers” own government is therefor studiously ignored, as it ruins their childish fantasy.

    I have to commend the designers of the system.

    Using the very money stolen from all its slaves to fund it, they have, via the public “education” system, successfully brainwashed [“educated”] their naive, trusting citizen slaves into believing that the state is wise, good and its rulers actually deserve to rule over them and run everyones lives for them , because the citizens themselves are incapable of so doing.

    Quite a scam, I must say. 😏

    “All government, in its essence, is a conspiracy against the superior man: it’s one permanent object is to oppress him and cripple him… One of its primary functions is to regiment men by force, to make them as much alike as possible and as dependent upon one another as possible, to search out and combat originality among them.” H. L. Mencken,

    “the purpose of government is for those who run it to plunder those who do not.” Thomas DiLorenzo

    Regards, onebornfree

    • Agree: RoatanBill, Mark G.
    • Replies: @Mefobills
  26. SafeNow says:

    In his recent book (about 1.5 years ago), Christopher Caldwell asked: “What did \$20 trillion in debt buy?” Answering his own question, he wrote “Social peace.”

    This will be the reparations amount. Whatever it takes to continue to buy social peace.

  27. A man [Party B] attends at the office of a lawyer / solicitor. The lawyer / solicitor solicits the man to raise his right hand, swear, and sign the following security that is to then be registered:

    In consideration of \$2.1 million of lawful money…, now paid by [Party A] to [Party B], the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, [Party B] doth grant and mortgage unto [Party A], its successors and assigns forever, ALL AND SINGULAR the Lands subject only to the Permitted Encumbrances.

    Stop. There.

    Has the man and / or the lawyer committed a criminal act?

    Answer: It depends on one thing, and one thing only – whether Party A had in fact paid him \$2.1 million of lawful money of [whatever country] and that he had received it.

    But it’s just a technicality, isn’t it?

    Answer 1: So what? The prisons are full of people who have been incarcerated on technicalities. And the people are being openly looted of their property under civil-forfeiture-rules on the basis of things they did not even know were illegal, and no obligation for the confiscating party to prove anything at all – they just take it and say – Suck it up, Buttercup – the law is the law. And the precise issue here has been directly answered by the country’s Supreme Court in criminal law jurisdiction, and with an emphasis on the obvious fact of it:

    …because he could reasonably anticipate that the fraudulent system would later be somehow validated. In other words, there is no intent to defraud within the requirement of [the criminal law fraud section] if the accused person, while deliberately committing an act which is clearly fraudulent, expects that that which he is doing, may, at a later date, be validated. To me the very statement of this proposition establishes its error in law.

    Answer 2: (and regardless) No it is not just a technicality. The bank and its management really do receive, recognize, record and convert the false receipt as a cash-equivalent-money-asset.


    Maybe – just maybe – the banks obtain virtually all of their “money” as falsified receipts and maybe – just maybe – the financial solicitors are in the aiding, abetting, and money-laundering business.

    And maybe – just maybe – that’s why you find these kind of disclaimers in said securities:

    NOTWITHSTANDING the provisions of any Statute [any lawful Act of Parliament] … this contract shall remain in full force and effect…

    Just to be clear, these ever-more ubiquitous disclaimers are not technically disclaimers at all.

    The above directive in fact originated in the mind of a senior solicitor for a major financial institution, and who was very likely of similar elevated status within the BAR.

    That disclaimer is in fact a direct order by a senior member of the BAR to the judges of Her Majesty’s Courts that they shall wholly disregard the laws of the Crown.

    AND – the judges are in fact obeying and acting upon those orders to disregard the laws of the Crown.

    Fraud and forgery have been commercially normalized – made routine. The little people go to jail for it – while the Fat Cats get bonus checks!

    A year or so ago I was in attendance at the Court of Appeal trying to get the directly-appointed ex-bankers who call themselves judges to appreciate the two dozen or so flagrant criminal offences on the face of the so-called securities. But they wouldn’t listen, and instead demanded that the complaining party post \$300,000 to pay for the bank’s legal costs when the complaining party ultimately loses as they must.

    We countered by offering to pay the \$300,000 into Court, provided that the Court would first give us a sworn, signed and notarized receipt stating categorically that we had already done so.

    We still lost – but their costs dropped from \$300,000 to about \$5,000.

    But I could see the judge’s eyes and reaction to the offer and request. He knew what was really going on.

    They get really angry when you force them to admit that they’re just gangsters – but gangsters they are.

    I actually feel sorry for the majority of economists who for whatever reason cannot cross that criminal-law-line.

    If they did, then among the first things they would notice is that there are thousands upon thousands of police officers out there risking their lives on a daily basis over relatively piddling property rights, while the organised institutional criminals steal more money in fact on a single day, than all the armed-robberies in the country’s history combined.

  28. Thomasina says:

    Tucker Carlson’s monologue re the economy. The government, having closed down the economy and school system over Covid, is paying workers to stay at home. He says the workers are being rational: who would choose to work when you can get paid for staying at home.

    The government keeps printing money in order to facilitate the above, and yet employers can’t find workers – or at least have to pay more money just to entice them back to work.

    The government’s money printing is causing inflation. Everything is going up in price.

    Looks like the workers will end up being paid more money, and everyone will cheer, but if everything just costs more to buy, how much further are they really ahead? They’re not.

    The bankers have been furiously trying to “create” inflation for years now in order to paper over their looting operations. They’ve printed trillions since 2008, which has caused assets (houses, rents, stocks) to rise, screwing over the poor. Now they are working on getting wages up by artificially creating the “Covid crisis”, which might get wages up, but at what price? Higher cost of everything you buy.

    They’ve artificially depressed interest rates in order to hand out cheap money to their friends who, in turn, buy back their stocks and purchase assets, forcing prices up on real estate.

    As Tucker says, there’s too much money sloshing around and it’s handed out too cheaply.

    All artificial, and the mark of “the government” is all over this chaos.

  29. Mefobills says:

    You didn’t even listen to the interview, and all you can do is post Mises BS.

    Here it is, bolded parts for emphasis for your reading comprehension.

    They hired a man named James Fifield and he started an organization called Spiritual Mobilization and he recruited tens of thousands of pastors across the United States to preach what Kevin Kruse calls Christian libertarianism. Essentially, that Jesus endorsed the free market economy and that to be Christian is to be a libertarian. That got pushed very hard over and against the social gospel, over and against what FDR’s administration had tried to implement, and was their strategy for how to push back against the New Deal. Not simply do it politically, but do it by tying it to people’s faith.

    Libertarianism is involved with a warped kind of Christianity, which UNZ readers are familiar with, JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY. Libertarianism is in lock step with Jewish propaganda.

    And then, of course, after the civil rights movement, that gets tied together with those people who came in and formed the religious right and said that the way to push back against the civil rights movement is not as the segregationists did in the South but rather to do it in the name of morality, in the name of traditional values, in the name of faith. All of that fuses together and creates avenues and a whole wraparound culture of radio shows, books, Christian television, para church organizations, political organizations, that reinforce a message over and over again that to be Christian is to be a reactionary right-wing libertarian. Believe that the economy has the final word. It says, “in God we trust,” on the money, which means for most people that we trust the money to be how God is working in the world. People have easily bought the lie that, if you have money, God has blessed you, if you don’t have money, it’s because you haven’t been true to God. It blames the poor. It uses these lies to justify a system that is set up to benefit the very elite and it’s produced what we are now talking about in the public square as Christian nationalism. But I think people don’t realize that this has been around for a long time and there’s a whole culture that supports it

    “A reactionary right-wing libertarian. ” I got mine and screw you, and we must promulgate lies about the fabric of reality is the underhanded objective.

    It uses these lies to justify a system that is set up to benefit the very elite and it’s produced what we are now talking about in the public square as Christian nationalism.

    It isn’t Christian-Nationalism, it is Judeo-Christianity combined with Libertarianism which obscures usury, rent-seeking and other methods of getting over and taking sordid-gain.

    A skull-fu*k religion and ideology are wrapped up together. Lolbertarians do not occupy the moral high ground.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  30. Mefobills says:

    It seems Lolbertarians are some sort of sperg-like autists who are immune to actual facts. And when presented with facts, ignore them and hew to their false doctrine.

    I already presented to you many times in history which refute your contention. See link below:

    “There’s no such thing as a right sized government. Every government grows to consume as much as possible because the process of gov’t attracts the sociopaths / psychopaths in the society. “

    Most people, including the author of the article, do not understand the true , unchangeable, wholly criminal nature of any/all governments, let alone exactly why they are unalterably so , regardless of who runs them.

    They prefer to live in a fantasy world where government can do “good”, as long as the “right” people are in it, and it is the “right” size.

    It is not a fantasy, there were many times in history where government was able to balance civilization, in some cases lasting for over a thousand years. I’ve listed a few at the link below, and there are many more.

    It is usually personality defectives who operate in-concert to take down balanced governments, by working from the inside to then take sordid gain. In other words, Lolbertarians are the personality defectives promulgating false doctrine, so they can then get-over.

  31. Ed Case says:
    @Caspar Von Everec

    Here’s the simplest way, not top down, anyone can do it:
    Start eating rare steak, buy in a cryovacced bag, keep on the bottom shelf at 2 degrees, cut a steak off when hungry, reseal bag, replace in fridge, repeat as necessary.
    There might even be a place for blacks in that economic system.

  32. Mefobills says:

    Damn right ! A truly insightful comment. If in addition to the house you also gave him a million dollars cash he would also be broke in a short while. I’ll bet the \$27M settlement Floyd’s family got is already blown or by the end of the year will all be gone.

    Economist and preacher fucks do have a grasp of reality ie reality for them and theories for the disenfranchised. I have yet to meet a poor preacher and economists seem to live a rather good life while idiots fumble around translating their bullshit.

    You are right. No one can make this shit up.

    Well you are right in that Leftists are not race realists. Negroes do not have a forward time sense as they did not evolve for it in the ice ages. Also, African languages do not code for time. So, if isn’t in the language, it isn’t in the brain.

    However, leftist economists and preachers are not wrong about the 40 acres and a mule that was given for reparations, and then got screwed over. That would have given American blacks a leg-up to then till the land, make it work, and then have life. There was plenty of land available.

    My form of reparations would be to use the bill system, where American blacks have a choice, they can use the bills to go to Africa, or buy a home. Either way, they can no longer whine about slavery, as once they sign the agreement, the deal is done. Bill systems require the person receiving the bill to SIGN IT – effectively making a legal contract. Upon signature, they have to to shut-up, otherwise black Jewish leadership will continue to beat whitey over the head forever.

    Hudson is a leftist, which means his brain function is compromised when it comes to race reality, but he is not wrong on the bigger economic picture. Lolbertarians are wrong on the bigger economic picture.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
  33. Che Guava says:

    i stopped reading as soon as the Corona bullshit appeared.

  34. Anon[140] • Disclaimer says:

    Typical anti-Southern attacks from yankee idiots who simply make up their facts. Reparations is an issue for the slave trading New England states, not the South. The South was burned out, it’s governments dissolved. There is no continuity to slavery in the South. There is in the North. The same banks and insurance companies that financed the slave trade exist to this day. J.P Morgan and Aetna for example. Why are they not paying reparations? Why is not Harvard, Yale, Princeton or the states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island and all the New England states not paying “reparations.” Indeed, how come they don’t have to pay reparations for the atrocities they committed during an illegal invasion of a foreign nation and occupation. They were too busy stealing Southern property that is why. But then they have continued to do the same thing in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq…the list goes on. Just more yankee hypocrisy.

    The New England states had the carrying trade. The South had no maritime capacity. In the NE states to this day at least 1/3 of the infrastructure of those states were built off the massive wealth of the New England slave trade. The Cabots, lodges, and other New Englanders sent their ships to African slave ports, and then for resale in Cuba, South America, and the South. Why not cut a check for all illegal slave trade money that built Boston and the rest of the yankee states.


    And how did the South try to deal with the problem? By being the first states to pass laws banning the international slave trade. The Northern slave trade continued until 1865. New York city was the epicenter during the 1850s. It was the South who funded the support for colonization back to Africa and the establishment of a black nation on that continent. But it was the New England and British funded “abolitionists” who sabotaged the American Colonization Society. And when that failed it was the New England slave traders who prevented the South from immigrating emancipated Negroes to western lands so that they could have their own political state as a member of the United States union. Two-thirds of the western lands to this day are held in trust and mortgaged for the perpetual debt that Black Republicans saddled on the Northern states to pay for the invasion of a sovereign nation.

    The insinuation that Southern secession, and establishing a sovereign nation was an “insurrection,” is mildly amusing though it demonstrates a profound ignorance of the definition of the word insurrection. Insurrection and/or rebellion are attempts to overthrow a lawful government. Hardly the case when The Confederate States of America was the nation invaded. But you need an excuse for conquest. A fine example is the rebellion of 1776 that overthrew the rule of the British Empire resulting in theft of the crown’s property. Those “forefathers” were called “insurrectionists,” and “Rebels.” And they were rebelling against a monarchy! I thought in a Republic the people get to decide who governs? Maybe I missed a memo.

    To be accurate, It was the reprobate Lincoln’s attack with an armed fleet on Charleston harbor that initiated the response against Fort Sumpter. That action by the South Carolinians is fully justified under the Law of Nations. Lincolns was an act of war. An unjustified war conducted by a dictator.

    Yes, a dictator. He usurped the constitution and established the office of dictator. In the same fashion as Julius Caesar. The 36th Congress adjourned without quorum which dissolved that body permanently. They were called back into a new session by the authority of a dictator, not by the electorate. He declared war in his first inauguration speech and initiated conflict against a lawfully ordained foreign nation. The list of his crimes takes several books, but the significant point is that his actions were done without permission of the legislature and in violation of the contract of 1787. Because that is what the constitution of 1787 was, a contract. Specifically, a trust and service contract. Not a monarchy, aristocracy, or democracy. A contract of Sovereign states. You cannot rebel against a contract. You merely withdraw when one party fails to adhere to the terms. That is secession. To take back rights previously ceded. The right of any people. To deny that right is conquest. Regardless, that contract was dissolved nominally in 1861 and officially in 1866. Any discussion of it is academic.

    As to slavery it only EXISTED in the New England slave trading states. By definition slavery is the absence of all rights of property. Property is the basis of all laws, civil or common law. Labor is property. Upon sale in the South, New England slaves became Southern bonded servants. The distinction is not semantic. Bond servants are contract servants. The asset value of a bond servant is their labor. You borrow based on the value of your assets. The riches of New England were made because they bought slaves in Africa at about \$50 per head average and sold them in the South at labor prices. Southerners did not buy slaves, they bought labor. Humans are cheap, labor is expensive. If you want to borrow from banks in NY, Boston, etc., they calculate the collateral based on the asset value of the labor. The New Englanders got the cash, the Southerners the debt.

    That is why the U.S. Census Bureau counted the number of “slaves,” a generic term of the day encompassing all forms of bonded labor. Over 70% of the federal government’s revenue came from Southern exports. And governments borrow on the assets in its trust, primarily labor. For individuals, their land was owned in allodial fee-simple. No bank will lend money to land they cannot repossess. Bonded labor can be sold to cover debt.

    The “institution of slavery,” so-called, was in fact an institution. Just like a university, hospital, or insane asylum. An institution, promulgated into law provides a social function. In the case of negro bonded labor, it was for their upkeep and maintenance. The revenue generated by cotton sales went directly back into the labor, not the land. By asset price-inflation, either through seignorage or investment, plantation owners have greater borrowing power. The problem was that cotton prices were steadily declining and black labor was incredibly expensive. You have four million in institutions, but your revenue is generated by only about 750, 0000 men. Women and children do not generate revenue. They generate expenses.

    If yankees want reparations so they can buy black votes, fine. Pay for it yourself. Or why not give blacks their due inheritance, land out west for their own black state. That is their inheritance afterall. First proposed by Thomas Jefferson in 1777. And continued by Southern politicians until 1860. Instead of “40 acres and a mule,” how about their own state!

    The whole issue was the territories. When the yankee funded abolitionists sabotaged the American Colonization Society’s efforts to give the freedman a new country in Africa, the South looked west to unoccupied lands. You cannot grow cotton and therefore you can’t pay for bond servants, but freedman can be resettled in rich farming lands and access the minerals. That is exactly what the Kansas-Nebraska dispute was about. You certainly can’t spread slavery. That is stupid. If you take labor from one place that is a negative; and if you add it to another place it’s a positive. People aren’t butter, you can’t “spread” them. But you can resettle them. Lincoln and his railroad cronies invaded the South to prevent that resettled from occurring. And it was no secret. And if the South had been successful blacks today would have their own state, several. And to make matters worse, the yankees once again stepped in to prevent the “exodusters” of 1879 from settling out west. This despite financial support from white Southerners.

    The “end of the civil war,” was conquest and subjugation of the Southern people. And instead of 40 acres and a mule, Lincoln gave the newly “freed,” slaves concentration camps. According to the Superintendent of the Census for 1870, two million black freedman had been slaughtered by disease and starvation resulting from being cast off the plantations where their sustenance and care was provided. This does not count the number of murders and rapes by yankee soldiers. Certainly, there is an argument for the U.S. government to account for this genocide and pay reparations as they have recently recognized the Armenian genocide. Or am I missing something?
    And as for President Davis, he was a political prisoner for two years. He was not prosecuted because there was no case. You cannot prosecute the head of a foreign government and maintain the specious argument that the “police action” was about putting down an insurrection or freeing slaves. You recognize the sovereignty of the Southern states if you prosecute the head of government. But that is the least of it.

    President Davis knew everything that the dictator and legislative oligarchy in Washington had done to conquer the South. He knew that the government had declared bankruptcy in 1863 because they did not have the gold to pay the interest on \$3.5 billion dollars of accumulated debt, at an average of 7% per annum, compounded! He knew that that the black republicans had mortgaged the entire continent, minus the Confederate states to borrow that paper currency minus about \$400 millions of depreciated greenbacks. A lien (income tax) was placed on the future earnings of the entire country to pay that debt, which has only been added to since that time. All the stocks of the continent were “pledged” as collateral for that debt. Today, Cede & Co., of Wall Street, Manhattan, NY, is the registered owner of ALL stocks traded on any U.S. stock exchange. And as corporations are fictionally treated as persons, the banks do own it all. Thanks for that Lincoln.

    Prosecuting President Davis was never going to happen. Lincoln et al, including the traitor Johnson were terrified of all their crimes coming out in court. Despite assembling the most preeminent constitutional lawyers in the North and having a guaranteed rigged jury, Stanton, Johnson, et al., were advised not to bring President Davis to trial or the whole government would be condemned as the real traitors who overthrew the Republic and sold out an entire continent.

    To avoid trial the cowards tortured him in prison hoping he would die. But he was too strong for those worms. He wrote letter after letter demanding to be put on trial, but the cowards refused. They tried to pin the dictator’s assassination on him to cover Stanton who arranged the assassination. Yet still, the greatest man this continent has ever produced outlive all that repulsive scum.

    President Davis was hailed as a hero on every continent he traveled; kings and princes gave him audience. The President never employed a bodyguard. No one ever tried to assassinate President Davis, except the cowards in Washington. The repugnant Lincoln was the most hated human being on the earth at that time. His reputation today is sustained only by a massive propaganda campaign spanning more than a century. Will the yankees will finally admit that the “civil war” was a war of conquest. To pay for it they dissolved the Trust of 1787 (The Constitution of the United States of America), and indebted in perpetuity, an entire continent. If you want to give reparations, start with the truth.

    And as for freeing the slaves, once again this groups ignorance is astounding. The bond servants in the South were never “freed.” They were confiscated under the act of 1863. Besides the two million they slaughtered in concentration camps (a new method of genocide invented by the yankees) and allowed to starve out in the open after throwing them off the plantations, the rest were forced into the army to aid in the destruction of the South or used to rig elections and deny white Southerners political rights. From bond servants’ freedmen were made wards of the Federal state by the 14th amendment and then of the incorporated civil government in 1871. And that is their status to this day. Of course, segregation continued in the North as it still does to this day. Blacks have no political rights in the North, just the illusion of rights. While invading the South, every Northern state passed added laws to prevent blacks from entering their state. The constitution of Ohio did not ban “slavery” until 1865. The constitution of Illinois did not allow blacks to enter their state until it was revised after the war. But the hypocrites always blame the South. But then the conqueror writes the history.

    As far as emancipation, it was always going to happen. It was not a matter of choice but of political economy. Black bond servants were extremely expensive labor. In 1860, a prime field hand went for \$1500, in GOLD! A blacksmith, \$3500, if you are lucky. Add insurance, interest on loans, medical, dental, clothing, food, etc., and plantations were simply a poor business model due to high labor costs. Sound familiar?

    That is why the margins on plantations were so small, about 8.1% on average. Plantations generated vast revenue for the Federal government, New England, and New York bankers and for the textile mills of the New England states. But plantation profits were small and constantly bankrupted and often insolvent, requiring liquidation. The simple question was what to do with the freedman when those institutions failed. Simple, dissolve their bonds, colonized them out west, and hire local cheap white labor and watch your margins go to about 50%.
    You won’t debt forgiveness, give it up. The yankees mortgaged this continent along time ago. You want reparations, pay up. You broke it, you bought it. You won’t to keep shitting on white Southerners, go ahead. We have survived worse, and we will survive this.

    • Thanks: Thomasina
  35. Thomasina says:

    Blacks have been receiving reparations in the form of welfare, subsidized housing, affirmative action for years and years.

    So if you want to give them reparations, you’ve got to subtract what’s already been given them. To the tune of billions.

    Do that and you might conclude that they owe you!

    Whitey has already paid enough. Do not ask him to pay AGAIN.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @Mefobills
  36. Lee says:

    I usually look at the subject of reparations from an opposite viewpoint than most.

    Why aren’t the western African countries that hunted down the blacks,kept them penned up for months on end, and then traded them off for firearms when the slave ships arrived required to pay reparations ?

    If it weren’t such a large passage of time since the slave trade ended, this might be considered by some to be fair.

  37. Mefobills says:

    Whitey has already paid enough. Do not ask him to pay AGAIN.

    That’s a defeatist attitude.

    Channeling new credit into new production is practically free, so you do not pay. The future ends up with improved infrastructure, improved production, and simultaneous jew/negro removal.

    But, it would take a Kingdom or some sort of Fascist government, because there are many people who are convinced that the economic game is zero sum.

    • Replies: @Thomasina
  38. BeeGee says:

    The Bell Curve was correct. There are individual differences in intellectual capacity and they seem to be genetic. The mean/median of IQ equal to 100 is not very bright. It’s about equal to a moderately functioning fast food worker or Dollar Store staff. I’m guessing the average In and Out Burger worker of 20 yr ago when they were paying \$10 in CA was at least 110-115. Superior and quick service.

    Anyone between 100 and 85 IQ is pretty much good for store stocking and manual labor with close supervision. That means that at least 35% of the country is virtually incapable of doing useful work for pay outside of a sheltered workshop setting. Fully half the country is only capable of heavily supervised work with limited intellectual requirements.

    Add to intellectual differences the apparent fact that attitude and mindset seem to make a difference also. I personally, with a Masters degree and an IQ in the top 2 percent, managed to blow through a half million dollar windfall in 3 years merely through ignorance and a series of bad business decisions totally without any kind of substance abuse.

    Point being, for a variety of reasons, any attempts to equalize outcomes as well as opportunities — even outright gifts of cash — are doomed to fail. Individual differences are too powerful. At least half the adult population is operating at a level where they almost require custodial care. I don’t see a viable solution, certainly not those proposed in this article.

    • Agree: ruralguy, showmethereal
  39. Panadechi says:

    Beware of this parasite..

  40. frontier says:

    This foolishness verifies the old saw that some ideas are so stupid only a college professor or a cleric could believe them.

    You are right, that’s the reality from taxpayers point of view. However, the grifterconomists make nice piles of cash while selling their snake oil bullshit. A default as jubilee… what a bunch of idiots. I don’t read Hudson any more or Mefobills for that matter, he replaces reason with attacks on Mises, who’s also wrong but that proves nothing. Listening to their nonsensical quarrel is pointless and a boring waste of time. Yeah, sure, the politicians who created this mess are gonna fix it… by taking even more of our money and by rampant inflation which has already started on its way to Wiemar. I used to laugh at their antics but it isn’t funny any more, these thieves have done so much damage and intend to do a lot more, nothing is coincidental.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  41. Thomasina says:

    “Channeling new credit into new production is practically free, so you do not pay. The future ends up with improved infrastructure, improved production, and simultaneous jew/negro removal.”

    I’m tired of hearing terms like “practically free”. That’s what we were told when they offshored the jobs to China: “Don’t worry, you’re going to benefit.” Yeah, right!

    For every winner there is a loser. Tell me who the loser is in your scenario. Tell me.

    • Replies: @Mefobills
  42. Mefobills says:

    For every winner there is a loser. Tell me who the loser is in your scenario. Tell me.

    Zero sum thinking implies that for every winner, there must be a loser.

    Suppose you have an economy where there is, say 20% unemployment and there is general malaise.

    By channeling new credit through removal of unwanted individuals, said credit is then forced to stimulate new production.

    People that formerly were not working, become workers and get to produce goods and services they would not have absent the stimulation. This extra production comes not with zero sum, but increases… something like turning up an engine that was idle, where the engine only needed more gas.

    Channeling can be done easy enough with a bill system, which I have explained before here Unz. I have even given step by step details, but I do not expect average readers to remember those details, or even have read them.

    The Bill system is what the original American Colonists used to get things going. They were sitting around looking at each other, they had skills, but they had no money as demand. So, they created bills, which then channeled toward industry.

    The NAZI’s did the same thing, via their Mefo and Oeffa Bills, which then stimulated production. NSDAP economy never had a great depression.

    There was a “free lunch” if you compared NSDAP economy, to the American/European economies which were in depression.

    Suffice to say, there is plenty of economic overhead, to then remove undesirables. The undesirables are actually an economic drag, as most of them are parasites.

    • Agree: GeeBee
  43. Mefobills says:

    Yeah, sure, the politicians who created this mess are gonna fix it… by taking even more of our money and by rampant inflation which has already started on its way to Wiemar.

    You lolbergs don’t even know that the Weimar inflation was done under a private banking operation.

    And actually the fix was to return the Reichsbank back to government control.

    Listening to their nonsensical quarrel is pointless and a boring waste of time.

    Who is going to listen to an ignoramus who doesn’t even know the basics about Wiemar?

    All this butt-hurting about Hudson is really about Lolbertarians having their worldview exposed as a charade, and said lolbergs are too weak to confront their own BS narrative.

    When it comes to economics and the debt money system, Hudson is drilling bulls eyes.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • LOL: frontier
  44. Malla says:

    My two cents on reducing poverty. To reduce poverty long term, the population has gotta be transformed into a very high trust population. Less people rip off each other, bully each other out, use cunning or force to deprive each other of their wealth and happiness, better the society will perform. And that is what the National Socialist project of the Third Reich was all about, to create a super-high trust population based on folk. Super-high trust population = super civilized population. Hitler said he wanted to socialize the population itself, where the people of different classes see each other as One Folk, understand each other’s problems, help each other and work together for folk. If the population is socialized, you do not need to common ownership of land and all that bullshit, like in the Bolshevik style.

  45. Clearly, the system we use to distribute income is unsatisfactory; this is evidenced by the great disparities that exist between poverty, destitution, and owners of great wealth. We need a system, that will take nothing from the rich, whilst, at the same time, guaranteeing to every living individual, the means to live, to be fed, housed, educated and maintained in good health.
    We possess the means to achieve this, but they have been usurped, taken for themselves, by a small group of individuals in the past, at a time when they were in positions of power. They held the keys to this solution, but were not willing for it to be shared to the greater populations for the “General Good”. There is no longer any need for this great injustice to continue; for if great numbers of people accept this proposed system, which may be introduced at very little cost or inconvenience; then it will be Democratically introduced.


    This proposed system relies principally that People revise their
    understanding of “Money” , to discard all the fake mystery’s they have been taught, and to understand the simplicity of printed debt free, interest free Government controlled money and how it can best serve humanity. To begin with, Money and Currency is simply printed at very little cost; and this is safe provided the printing of it is very difficult to copy, is controlled only by Governments, and some “safeguards” are introduced to prevent misuse and control of any greedy and unnecessary accumulations. This is easily accomplished without disrupting or interfering with trades and entrepreneurship.
    The cry will arise from the wealthy, just as it has for hundreds of years,that printing money will devalue that already in circulation, and that it will create untold levels of inflation; in fact none of this is true. Money that is printed and issued interest free and debt free, because we do not need to borrow it, and it is destined to be “Spent” directly and immediately into circulation, does not create inflation, money already in circulation will continue to buy anything and everything because nothing else has changed, and money cannot devalue itself.
    This system will pay to every individual that needs it, a basic living income for life, it will be paid to everyone whose means either do not exist, or they fall below a calculated “break-even” amount; this group of individuals must perforce spend this income directly into circulation in order to live. The amount paid will be under constant Government controlled review to ensure it keeps pace with the real economy. This represents the basic fail-safe economy because it will prevent Bank,Stock Market and Financial Market initiated slumps and collapses, from affecting the basic economy or the security of incomes, and it will be the primary motivation for production and supply for all Corporations, Companies, manufacturers , retailers and sole traders.
    Those in receipt of the guaranteed income will be encouraged to take up employment from whom ever may provide it; The guaranteed income may be supplemented by such other earned income as may be gained, without loss or penalty deductions from the Guaranteed Income amount; this will encourage those who are able and willing to work to further improve their standard of living; some will choose not to do so, and they must still be cared for.. Such additional income will be earned at reduced
    rates, because it will stand on the shoulders of the Guaranteed Income, and this will benefit the employer and business and may be viewed as an investment in the economy; individuals will be absolutely free to choose employments and working/environments settled and decided amicably between employer and applicant. When the conditions or environment are
    unsatisfactory people need not accept them, unless they accept a
    suitable compensatory reward.
    Taxation of individuals will cease, until their death, when “Estates” will be assessed, using criteria that formulates to prevent personal fortunes becoming too great, which may then distort several areas of the economy.
    Only Corporations and Commercial entities will be assessed for taxation for the same reason,and the paramount need to prevent monopolies being created, which also distort Economies.
    This is a system capable of adjustment and variation, at very short notice, which is a point not to be overlooked.
    Government will finance all infrastructure building and All Social
    Services using the debt free, interest free, printed money, because by definition, all this money is spent directly into the economy. This will include the building of accommodations for those in the lower incomes bracket.

    This system will facilitate, in effect, a two tier Economy. One tier
    will encompass those entitled to receive the Guaranteed Income, together with their Social needs; the upper tier will encompass all others, and will operate like any other Capitalist Free Market Economy, subject to those constraints recorded earlier above.

    Every Sovereign Nation possesses the right to introduce such a system, no permissions are required from any other entity to do so.

  46. @bayviking

    Yes but because he doesn’t toot the horn of the corporate class – his voice is out on the margins. Brilliant economist indeed though

  47. @The Soft Parade

    You completely miss the fact that the Bible is not in favor of selfish communism. The societal system if you bothered to read all the codes very much dealt with scammers and the like. Those types of laws wouldn’t happen now because it would be called “draconian”. That’s the issue.

    • Replies: @Smith
  48. @Mefobills

    Yeah putting “In God We Trust” on the money is a complete joke. It was put there to be in opposition to the atheist Soviet Union. Didn’t people read “you can’t serve God and mammon” or that “the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil”??? My guess is it was the deists like many of the “Founding Fathers” of the US.

  49. @Serge Krieger

    There’s a lot of room for reasonable disagreement about which economic system provides well enough for everyone who is part of the community (citizens) and making a sincere industrious effort, without mass violence or intimidation and terrifying centralization of power over social life, thought, speech, assembly, worship, etc.

    We should be able to agree that neither communism nor the current globalist militarist mass-migration finance-capitalism is the way to go.

    I don’t think that all the people who fled the USSR were all lying or exaggerating. And I’m not talking about Jews or anyone else with some racial, religious, or historic ax to grind against Russia or Slavs.

  50. @nsa

    I don’t think Hudson is being realistic there, nor fair to those people who work hard.

    But haven’t our rulers already printed and borrowed about \$32 Trillion to pay for their wars and occupations over the past thirty years?

    It’s seemingly already led to price inflation, and it may lead to much more. But it does show that if our thug rulers (not “leaders”) instead wanted to find the money for us all to have decent paid-for or affordable housing, medical insurance and care, dental insurance and care, they could have. They didn’t want to.

    Instead of inflationary printing/borrowing of more dollars unbacked by any additional production or store of value, we should consider another way to provide a real standard of living — without constant anxiety and prices increasing faster than wages for regular people. I would suggest public ownership of our God-given natural resources under the ground, including oil, natural gas, coal, and other metals and minerals.

    Proceeds from sale of the natural resources would be paid in equal shares directly to all non-incarcerated US Citizens. In other words, a more generous national version of the Alaska Permanent Fund (which has paid annual dividends usually ranging from \$1,000 to \$2,000 per resident since 1976).

    If that is not enough revenue for a sufficient UBI, there are at least two new federal excise taxes that would raise good revenue without hitting the majority of US Citizens. First, repeal federal marijuana prohibition and tax it ten percent. Second, tax transfers of cash to recipients outside our country 15-20%. (If people are here mainly to send money “home”, that may be admirable but we do not need them.)

    This is better than having government bureaucracies administering “programs” to help people. We avoid the cost of the government bureaucracies, but we also change the country’s politics. With universal basic income replacing dozens of federal and state programs, we don’t need all those gov employees — otherwise, they inevitably proliferate and become a strong political constituency for more government spending (on themselves, not infrastructure, defense, pollution control, or some other public good), taxation, and borrowing.

  51. Smith says:

    What is even “selfish communism”?

    Care to elaborate?

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  52. @Smith

    should have read “selfish capitalism nor communism”… meaning it doesn’t endorse either category because it has parts that encompass both in various ways.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Personal attacks and gratuitous insults are not acceptable and this author will ban such commenters.

 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
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS