We begin on a positive note by welcoming a “doer,” citizen extraordinaire, Jon Merryman, who couldn’t stand the trash, especially old tires, being dumped in his neighborhood.
Spinning tires uphill seems like a good way to forget what’s happening to this society. John Merryman has a great project. I always wondered what the huge piles of tires were used for on farms. They seem ubiquitous.
Robert Weissman lays out how the Republican tradeoffs between health care and food supports will end up in the pockets of giant corporations and the already wealthy. The challenges by Public Citizen admittedly are rearguard battles, but often the only path left to fight off the reactionary far-right Trump regime.
I write about a glaring error in categorizing protest to the Israel/Gaza war as violent in a one-man play for which I recently ushered. The word “violent” was used by the playwright, who is also the actor, to describe protest against that war which has been nonviolent using the tactic of civil disobedience. Readers can read or listen to my commentary, “One Man Got It Wrong" at: https://thelastnewleftist.com/one-man-got-it-wrong/
Kudos to the gentleman doing the clean up. I wish I had that energy and that money!
I was walking my dog along this Sierra Vista trail where I live. And he bought one of those grabber things and he brings a bag with him and he picks up trash along the trail.
My apartment complex has people who throw trash around in their kids and stuff. Down the street the city doesn't pick up the trash like they should. Maybe I'll get one of those picker upper things and start doing picking up trash since I am retired.
Okay not right now. It's gonna be a 102° to a 108° over the next 10 days. It'll definitely have to wait for that to be over until the next round…
I have this pill that if you take it it will extend your life for a healthy ten years, but since you have reached your limit for reading my stuff you ain't going to get it, the pill nor the how to.
Don't you just love the way the big shot news boys hang you out to dry. ( Thank you Ralph for letting me speak for free )
The news boys say. Get out your wallet you cheap guy or gal how do you think we're going to keep the doors open and the lights on?
My broblem is I am a painter ( no not the guy that will come by and paint your barn) I make stuff you see when you go to one of those fancy up scale art gallery's ,and admire, nice work walk out and you pay nothing.
You see in the old days ( My wife of 54 years tells me, don't use those words you sound so old , but honey I am an old geezer ( that's another story) back on subject.
In the old days if art captures your heart ( like falling in love) you bought it , something like taking it home putting it on your walls,it makes you feel good and sometimes makes you even more important to and with your friends.
But today you've got to get one of those real smart x hedge fund brokers to move your stuff, and he or she's got to get and sell the billionaire class on the idea your stuff has real value.
You see then, maybe I don't have to be so cheap and ask you to pay up when you walk through that gallery to look at my my stuff for free.
But here is the corker,,I made my bundle in the tech business years ago etc etc rich enough you don't have to buy or look at my stuff for free or at all and I don't have to hang you out to dry, ,,,because when you and I are long gone my stuff will have real value, it will be the last stuff made by a real human before A I and technology changed the world.
What's your contribution going to be before it's to late?
The National Debt seems to be a bugaboo in both parties - they both decry it, claiming that we are leaving future generations with a bigger burden from the accruing interest, let alone the "principle", and using it as an excuse to "not spend", and "blaming the "other Party" for increasing it, yet each continuing to contribute to it ....
I would like to see a discussion about MMT, say with Stephanie Kelton, regarding our ability to "print money" to pay it off - with Congress Constitut, authorized ability to direct the Treasury to mint coins (eg. "trillion dollar coin") to pay it off ... I know all the arguments about "inflation" etc. but it seems to me we could handle that with price controls - that has been done. Then the discussion would be not how much the Gov't should spend, but on what
The argument, so i understand, is that taxation is not needed to pay Gov't expenses - but instead as a redistribution mechanism to reduce growing inequality - so, yes, tax the rich, and use the money to pay for the needs of "we the people" as we the people determine ...
SH, I welcome further discussion of MMT on the RNRH. Stephanie Kelton would be a great guest. Randy Wray, Warren Mosler, Bill Mitchell, Fadhel Kaboub, and Pavlina Tcherneva would be some other great guests. If nothing else, RNRH listeners can read Kelton’s book and watch lectures online from the names I listed above.
I will try to clarify things from the MMT perspective as someone who certainly isn’t at the level of those names I mentioned above. One important thing to remember is that MMT is inherently value-neutral. MMT is not ‘progressive’ or ‘conservative’. MMT is merely an explanation of the monetary system and that is value-neutral. Now, one can certainly formulate a fiscal policy agenda which is informed by a knowledge of MMT which is designed to achieve progressive goals.
So with that in mind, I would disagree with the assertion that MMT advocates for using taxes as a redistributive method. MMT does indeed assert that tax receipts do not fund federal government spending. MMT does also assert that taxation is still important. There are some prominent MMTers who are progressive and who have made an MMT-informed fiscal policy case for using taxation as a way to increase income equality and to reduce the power the wealthy have to influence government, Bill Mitchell being the most prominent example, but their policy suggestions are merely informed by knowledge of MMT rather than being inherent to MMT.
As far as the ‘mint the coin’ MMT argument, most prominent MMTers do not advocate for such a measure because while it can be done, it really isn’t necessary. On the contrary, deficits need not be of importance. As things are, deficits are only of importance because the government still maintains vestiges of the gold standard, which essentially has not been in place since the 1930s, via the issuance of debt instruments such as bonds and Treasury bills. This, combined with government’s use of monetary policy (interest rates) to try to control inflation, which itself is another vestige of the gold standard, means that a high deficit and high interest rates means there is significant risk-free ‘free money’ for those who already have money. This drives income inequality.
The example of a country with more informed policy is Japan who has a much, much higher debt-to-GDP ratio than the US even and they’ve had this for decades now, but they maintain a near 0% interest rate policy. Japan has a very stable economy with lower unemployment than the US and greater income equality.
There is a misconception that MMT states that there is no limit to spending on the economy. While there is no limit to the amount of money government can spend into the economy, there are practical limitations and they are real resource limitations. This is to say that is not the creation of money which is inflationary, but how the money is spent which can be inflationary. If government, for example, enacted a very aggressive infrastructure appropriation to rebuild every bridge in the country within a 5 year period, this might require so much construction labor and materials that the private sector (businesses, homeowners, etc.) will have to pay much higher prices to secure labor and materials for their own construction projects. This can be inflationary, so government has to be mindful of real resource limitations. This really should be the focus of the Congressional Budget Office rather than the CBO’s current gold standard-based duties.
Now, as far as ‘government efficiency’ goes, government spending can enhance real resources. For example, increased spending in education enhances labor, leading to a stronger labor pool. Increased public health means a more productive labor force, which increases real resources.
If there is one policy suggestion which is nearly universally-held by prominent MMTers, it is that government guarantees full employment via a job guarantee program. This stabilizes labor prices during periods of economic recovery while also stabilizing demand during economic downturns. It keeps otherwise unemployed labor in an employable state when the private sector is ready to hire. It is known that employers prefer to hire already-employed workers rather than unemployed workers and we also know the social and personal ills associated with unemployment, especially long-term unemployment.
As far as price controls go, while they can be implemented when warranted, MMT suggests that aside fiscal policy, rather than monetary policy (interest rates), should be used to try to control inflation and promote full employment. For example, increased regulation to promote private sector competition, rather than deregulation which leads to monopolies/duopolies, is one example of an inflation-fighting policy. Increased use of public/social housing can be used to improve the availability of affordable housing. Comprehensive healthcare reform can be used to significantly reduce household costs. There are so many different fiscal policy ideas which are informed by MMT which can achieve so many things.
To ask Schumer and/or Jeffries to exercise one iota of muscle against the Republican cult is absolutely futile. Both are marshmellows. Their track record so far into our dear leader's presidency is zero. Distressing and appalling that these two are the "leads" for the Democratic Party in a Congress where at least half of the Democratic Congress people are millionaires plus. With a decided preference for self-preservation.
Hi Ralph and all ~ I'm grateful to hear you're talking about citizen 'doers'! I realize this may not be interesting to you or your listeners, but I thought I'd let you know that sixteen years ago I started a national prisoner reentry resource center called "Fair Shake" (www.fairshake.net).
In 2014, I created software, and today an 'app', which works exactly like the website, and is used in many institutions - state and federal. The website is a multi-stakeholder resource, too, so families, friends, employers, reentry professionals, corrections and citizens can find out how they can contribute to reentry success. It is completely free...including free from tracking. If you're interested in learning more, please reach out to me at sue@fairshake.net. Thanks so much for highlighting what individuals can do. For 25 years I have been told that what I do can't be done ~ : )
So interesting! It sounds like a win-win for everyone to help with reentry after imprisonment.
(If you can do such amazing software creation, then you may be the person who can design software for the "Getting Things Done"' (GTD) methodology of David Allen. Apparently many people tried for some time, and someone did approximate it, and it worked for about ten years, but I think not ideally. I'm not sure whether it is impossible to do, or whether there was a problem with the cost of doing it, but David Allen once long ago designed 19 screens to show what he believed was needed in such a program. Probably that needs to be updated now, since everything changes as practices shift to adjust to new realities. There is a world-wide community that would love love love to have software that precisely fits GTD, which is a very individualistic approach and needs to be quite customizable. There is an awful lot of software out there, and some is even designed for GTD, but apparently it is not what is needed. There's a real challenge for you, if you can do what people say can't be done).
Thanks for the info, Nancy! I tried to look up David Allen and Reentry but I did not find anything. If you find the slides or the program, I hope you'll share a link so I can check it out. My software/app is just the same as the website. It gives people inside the chance to use the tools and become familiar with the pages. but with no active links. In this way, the incarcerated folks can find resources (prisons, in general, offer no access to basic reentry resources), use the computer basics tutorial, and read virtual books in the libraries - to prepare for release. They can then reconnect to the active website - to request a copy of their birth certificate, or apply for a job, or locate a food pantry - when they are out.
I apologize, Sue. Apparently I gave you the impression that a connection exists between David Allen and reentry from prison projects. I did not intend to convey that message, and I know nothing about that. I appreciated the computer skills you expressed, and David Allen was interested in designing a software program especially for GTD, so I put those together and suggested you check that out.
David Allen is the person who developed the Getting Things Done (GTD) method of stress-free productivity and who wrote the book by that name. It might be worth a look because I cannot think of a better personal skill to learn for coping with life, which certainly could be helpful to prisoners reentering life outside.
You asked for links. I'm not sure that interests you now, but in case it does, the GTD book is available anywhere books are sold, including Amazon, if you want to check it out. Here is a link to an unofficial video that introduces GTD basics and seems pretty accurate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwvl5p77DTA
I checked out your web site, and it looks very helpful. I notice that you take pains to clarify how to navigate the site. It is nice to see that done because people are being left behind who have never had a computer, do not know how to use one, or cannot afford much technology and struggle to understand.
I was appalled to hear that people in prison who use your website are restricted from using active links to anything while in prison. It sounds like prisoners are limited to the resources you post on your website until they get out of prison, so what you offer can make a big difference.
Best wishes with this! Have you heard that Chris Hedges works with prisoners in a prison setting? I recall that the prisoners he worked with created and produced a play. He might have some useful suggestions. I hear that he is on substack.
I have an inquiry not related to this episode, but something I think is important and would appreciate a response to, if you don’t mind (It is rather complicated to explain, so please bear with me. ).
Specifically, like all of you, I am convinced we cannot have a government of “We the People“ so long as corporations and the wealthy are allowed through Citizens United to dominate contributions to political campaigns by so-called independent expenditures.
The rub, however, is how we can end this ill without also outlawing unlimited independent expenditures from laudable citizen groups.
Unions, for instance, are allowed to independently support candidates with unlimited funds. “Our Revolution,” which Senator Sanders supports, is entitled to make unlimited independent expenditures. And, as I understand it, so are organizations such as Public Citizen.
So the question I need help with is this: How we can put an end to so-called unlimited funding through independent expenditures by corporations and billionaires without putting an end to unlimited independent expenditures by unions and citizen groups as well?
Banning corporate contributions, alone, won’t do the job if billionaire corporation owners, like Elon Musk, Miriam Adelson, and George Soros, can still independently spend unlimited funds in support of their chosen candidates. The Israel lobby will still control our government so long as human billionaires can fund it.
So how can repeal of CU be effectively achieved without throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
Robert Weissman says the Deathocrats won't be able to undue what the Republikillers are doing until 2028. The last forty years have shown the Deathocrats will only campaign on doing what we want and need in 2026 and 2028 but will only do partial treating of symptoms without solving the problems.
The infrastructure bill is a perfect example. Weissman correctly described this as the most that has been done in history to deal with the War on Habitat. The problem is that it was also just a small part of what should have been done thirty plus years ago.
And that is the most the Deathocrats will actually do about anything in the next forty years as long as they are controlled by big money.
It is time for a discussion of Modern Political Theory. Rather than waste the next two election cycles perpetuating the failed approach of trying to get the big money Deathocrats to do what their corporate sponsors do not want them to do let's demand that politicians from any party do not take big money and enforce that demand with our votes in 2026 and 2028.
All the protests in the streets will just be a waste of time, treasure and effort if we vote for big money Deathocrats in the 2026 and 2028 elections.
It was voting for big money Deathocrats that gave us Trump. Let's not keep repeating the mistakes of the last forty years as it will only lead to someone even worse than Trump in the future.
You’re right that Weissman is probably a bit too optimistic about what a potential Democratic Party-led Congress and eventually the executive branch would mean. All evidence points towards the same, if not worse, foreign policy than what we’re seeing from the Republicans and domestic policy which might be better than what we’re seeing from the Republicans, but still incredibly neoliberal in nature.
Perhaps a Democratically-controlled Congress and presidency might be able to rollback some of Trump’s austerity, but I suspect they’ll never achieve, or try to achieve, even the levels of domestic policy we saw under the Biden administration and that was hardly a laudable period. The public will deem the Democratically-led period to be a failure, another Republican will take over and move things rightward and so the rightward drift never ends. It is the endless cycle of austerity and other right-wing behavior. I doubt the Democrats are really all that upset about any of this.
The Democrats may make restoring Medicaid part of their central platform. Even if they achieve that, and that is very iffy even if they have success in future elections, we’re still stuck with shoddy policy which was considered incomplete even in the 1960s when it was passed. Merely restoring Medicaid is hardly any great progressive accomplishment.
Health insurance is the culprit and not the budget cuts. Plenty of money in the budget for health care at competitive market prices, but not enough money for exorbitant bonuses for health care senior executives and not enough for the excessive dividends that shareholders want.
Lawyers are an economic tax on the public's rights.
Defund lawyers, judges, and legal systems. Get your country back.
Steve, thanks for the question about MMT and how it pertains to ‘the bill’. That said, I feel that the way Robert Weissman phrased things might still be confusing to the listeners.
I want to make one thing abundantly clear: ‘the bill’ cuts healthcare coverage *and* it cuts taxes for the wealthy. ‘The bill’ absolutely does not cut healthcare coverage *because* it cuts taxes for the wealthy.
Now, I know the latter is the common narrative spun by Democratic Party and progressive detractors, and perhaps also Republican supporters/detractors, but that should not be the case. That narrative is inherently neoliberal in nature. The Republicans could have maintained Medicaid and everything else while also formalizing the tax cuts. In fact, that’s pretty much the economic landscape since Trump I, and aside from the Covid lockdown era, the overall macroeconomic state of the country is stable even if has been more stable for the wealthy than the lower-income end. Hell, either party could have formalized the cuts and also increased healthcare spending and the macroeconomic state likely would be strong, if not stronger than before.
We need to be careful about these narratives. If increasing healthcare spending is the goal, and Weissman makes a good case for putting the focus on universal healthcare versus merely a return to the Medicaid status quo, the political focus has to be on healthcare itself and not on combining it with self-defeating tax increase narratives. We should never fall for neoliberal booby-traps in this regard.
Still, Steve, I’m pleased to see that you and Public Citizen are using more MMT-informed narratives. I hope to see this continue to grow, it is vitally important for all of us to achieve the goals we wish to see obtained and we all know Public Citizen is one of the most important groups working towards these progressive goals. Perhaps Public Citizen can reach out to the likes of Randy Wray and company to form some kind of economic committee to work on policy goals and framing.
On the tire recycling, I don't know why retreads are not more popular. Grinding up tires and using with the asphalt is not a positive solution as the microplastics just get more broken down and added to the air as car tires are the #1 source of microplastics in our environment which are highly toxic. I got replacement tires for my very high mileage Subaru for $50 each at a local junkyard, Cooper tires that were nearly new mounted and balanced. For $10 I found a local tire shop that took the used tires on the rim.
Any recycling of old tires is questionable with the crumb rubber and microplastics being a growing health hazard with many lawyers and lawsuits now popping up all over the internet for cancer victims due to PFAS toxins in the water etc.: https://tinyurl.com/2feupawm
There must be an incinerator that is able to burn trash without polluting anywhere near as much as shipping out garbage; as I understand it the toxic ash is the problem but the hotter the fire the less the toxic ash. Surely technology could work to burn without substantial toxins while fueling turbines to create electricity, etc..
Mr. Weissman is a very boring speaker; it's hard to see how he could be an effective leader of "Public Citizen".
“Mr. Weissman is a very boring speaker; it's hard to see how he could be an effective leader of "Public Citizen".”
I have qualms about certain statements made by Mr. Weissman, which I state in my standalone comment, but I did not find Mr. Weissman to be boring. If anything, Steve and David gave Weissman some rather technical questions and Weissman was simply answering them in an appropriate matter.
I appreciate Steve and David’s questions. I’ve said it before, but I find the RNRH to be more interesting when Steve, David, and Hannah are given a larger rôle in interviewing the guests and providing commentary. For one, I think the trio is more responsive to listener feedback than Mr. Nader is and each of the three generally ask informed, pertinent questions. Mr. Nader is often great at answering these questions when it is within Mr. Nader’s areas of expertise, which are numerous, but sometimes Mr. Nader’s questions seem more agenda-based rather than some of the more empirically-driven questions from the trio. I also feel that Mr. Nader sometimes addresses the RNRH audience at a ‘junior high education level’, like newspapers supposedly do, and this is quite disappointing for those looking for more sophisticated discourse similar to what I heard Mr. Nader offer years ago in his college guest lectures.
As Mr. Nader has said, having fire in the belly are requisites to fighting politically. Someone doing this work should not just have the passion of their principles but be energetic, tough-minded and forceful.
I just find it ironic that this country wants to build a dome to prevent missiles from reaching us, while it is clear that the destruction and eventually demise of the country is coming from within. If only we could build a dome against lack of empathy, imperialism, hubris and ignorance.
I am not convinced that our "enemies" would be so ridiculous and really try to attack us with missiles. as much as a lot of those countries are run by horrible people, the ones the US is afraid of - China, for example - are much better are envisioning something bigger. While we make enemies around the globe, China makes friends, builds things, invests in infrastructure to connect countries and regions. The reasons might be nefarious but they are not bombing and imposing their wishes by force and sanctions.
I have no trouble seeing how this all could end. Either the US self destroys and wither, or destroys the whole word.
Spinning tires uphill seems like a good way to forget what’s happening to this society. John Merryman has a great project. I always wondered what the huge piles of tires were used for on farms. They seem ubiquitous.
Robert Weissman lays out how the Republican tradeoffs between health care and food supports will end up in the pockets of giant corporations and the already wealthy. The challenges by Public Citizen admittedly are rearguard battles, but often the only path left to fight off the reactionary far-right Trump regime.
I write about a glaring error in categorizing protest to the Israel/Gaza war as violent in a one-man play for which I recently ushered. The word “violent” was used by the playwright, who is also the actor, to describe protest against that war which has been nonviolent using the tactic of civil disobedience. Readers can read or listen to my commentary, “One Man Got It Wrong" at: https://thelastnewleftist.com/one-man-got-it-wrong/
A great program!
Neoloberalism is a crime against humanity.
I voted for Ralph Nader!
Kudos to the gentleman doing the clean up. I wish I had that energy and that money!
I was walking my dog along this Sierra Vista trail where I live. And he bought one of those grabber things and he brings a bag with him and he picks up trash along the trail.
My apartment complex has people who throw trash around in their kids and stuff. Down the street the city doesn't pick up the trash like they should. Maybe I'll get one of those picker upper things and start doing picking up trash since I am retired.
Okay not right now. It's gonna be a 102° to a 108° over the next 10 days. It'll definitely have to wait for that to be over until the next round…
I have this pill that if you take it it will extend your life for a healthy ten years, but since you have reached your limit for reading my stuff you ain't going to get it, the pill nor the how to.
Don't you just love the way the big shot news boys hang you out to dry. ( Thank you Ralph for letting me speak for free )
The news boys say. Get out your wallet you cheap guy or gal how do you think we're going to keep the doors open and the lights on?
My broblem is I am a painter ( no not the guy that will come by and paint your barn) I make stuff you see when you go to one of those fancy up scale art gallery's ,and admire, nice work walk out and you pay nothing.
You see in the old days ( My wife of 54 years tells me, don't use those words you sound so old , but honey I am an old geezer ( that's another story) back on subject.
In the old days if art captures your heart ( like falling in love) you bought it , something like taking it home putting it on your walls,it makes you feel good and sometimes makes you even more important to and with your friends.
But today you've got to get one of those real smart x hedge fund brokers to move your stuff, and he or she's got to get and sell the billionaire class on the idea your stuff has real value.
You see then, maybe I don't have to be so cheap and ask you to pay up when you walk through that gallery to look at my my stuff for free.
But here is the corker,,I made my bundle in the tech business years ago etc etc rich enough you don't have to buy or look at my stuff for free or at all and I don't have to hang you out to dry, ,,,because when you and I are long gone my stuff will have real value, it will be the last stuff made by a real human before A I and technology changed the world.
What's your contribution going to be before it's to late?
Good luck America, have a great day my friends.
Thank Ralph and John Merryman!!
The National Debt seems to be a bugaboo in both parties - they both decry it, claiming that we are leaving future generations with a bigger burden from the accruing interest, let alone the "principle", and using it as an excuse to "not spend", and "blaming the "other Party" for increasing it, yet each continuing to contribute to it ....
I would like to see a discussion about MMT, say with Stephanie Kelton, regarding our ability to "print money" to pay it off - with Congress Constitut, authorized ability to direct the Treasury to mint coins (eg. "trillion dollar coin") to pay it off ... I know all the arguments about "inflation" etc. but it seems to me we could handle that with price controls - that has been done. Then the discussion would be not how much the Gov't should spend, but on what
The argument, so i understand, is that taxation is not needed to pay Gov't expenses - but instead as a redistribution mechanism to reduce growing inequality - so, yes, tax the rich, and use the money to pay for the needs of "we the people" as we the people determine ...
SH, I welcome further discussion of MMT on the RNRH. Stephanie Kelton would be a great guest. Randy Wray, Warren Mosler, Bill Mitchell, Fadhel Kaboub, and Pavlina Tcherneva would be some other great guests. If nothing else, RNRH listeners can read Kelton’s book and watch lectures online from the names I listed above.
I will try to clarify things from the MMT perspective as someone who certainly isn’t at the level of those names I mentioned above. One important thing to remember is that MMT is inherently value-neutral. MMT is not ‘progressive’ or ‘conservative’. MMT is merely an explanation of the monetary system and that is value-neutral. Now, one can certainly formulate a fiscal policy agenda which is informed by a knowledge of MMT which is designed to achieve progressive goals.
So with that in mind, I would disagree with the assertion that MMT advocates for using taxes as a redistributive method. MMT does indeed assert that tax receipts do not fund federal government spending. MMT does also assert that taxation is still important. There are some prominent MMTers who are progressive and who have made an MMT-informed fiscal policy case for using taxation as a way to increase income equality and to reduce the power the wealthy have to influence government, Bill Mitchell being the most prominent example, but their policy suggestions are merely informed by knowledge of MMT rather than being inherent to MMT.
As far as the ‘mint the coin’ MMT argument, most prominent MMTers do not advocate for such a measure because while it can be done, it really isn’t necessary. On the contrary, deficits need not be of importance. As things are, deficits are only of importance because the government still maintains vestiges of the gold standard, which essentially has not been in place since the 1930s, via the issuance of debt instruments such as bonds and Treasury bills. This, combined with government’s use of monetary policy (interest rates) to try to control inflation, which itself is another vestige of the gold standard, means that a high deficit and high interest rates means there is significant risk-free ‘free money’ for those who already have money. This drives income inequality.
The example of a country with more informed policy is Japan who has a much, much higher debt-to-GDP ratio than the US even and they’ve had this for decades now, but they maintain a near 0% interest rate policy. Japan has a very stable economy with lower unemployment than the US and greater income equality.
There is a misconception that MMT states that there is no limit to spending on the economy. While there is no limit to the amount of money government can spend into the economy, there are practical limitations and they are real resource limitations. This is to say that is not the creation of money which is inflationary, but how the money is spent which can be inflationary. If government, for example, enacted a very aggressive infrastructure appropriation to rebuild every bridge in the country within a 5 year period, this might require so much construction labor and materials that the private sector (businesses, homeowners, etc.) will have to pay much higher prices to secure labor and materials for their own construction projects. This can be inflationary, so government has to be mindful of real resource limitations. This really should be the focus of the Congressional Budget Office rather than the CBO’s current gold standard-based duties.
Now, as far as ‘government efficiency’ goes, government spending can enhance real resources. For example, increased spending in education enhances labor, leading to a stronger labor pool. Increased public health means a more productive labor force, which increases real resources.
If there is one policy suggestion which is nearly universally-held by prominent MMTers, it is that government guarantees full employment via a job guarantee program. This stabilizes labor prices during periods of economic recovery while also stabilizing demand during economic downturns. It keeps otherwise unemployed labor in an employable state when the private sector is ready to hire. It is known that employers prefer to hire already-employed workers rather than unemployed workers and we also know the social and personal ills associated with unemployment, especially long-term unemployment.
As far as price controls go, while they can be implemented when warranted, MMT suggests that aside fiscal policy, rather than monetary policy (interest rates), should be used to try to control inflation and promote full employment. For example, increased regulation to promote private sector competition, rather than deregulation which leads to monopolies/duopolies, is one example of an inflation-fighting policy. Increased use of public/social housing can be used to improve the availability of affordable housing. Comprehensive healthcare reform can be used to significantly reduce household costs. There are so many different fiscal policy ideas which are informed by MMT which can achieve so many things.
I hope all of this helps.
Thank you.
Seems like Drones & Satellite Imagery would be the most "Efficient" means of illegally dumped waste location.
Elon's Next Project! His contribution to a Healthy Humanity.
To ask Schumer and/or Jeffries to exercise one iota of muscle against the Republican cult is absolutely futile. Both are marshmellows. Their track record so far into our dear leader's presidency is zero. Distressing and appalling that these two are the "leads" for the Democratic Party in a Congress where at least half of the Democratic Congress people are millionaires plus. With a decided preference for self-preservation.
Hi Ralph and all ~ I'm grateful to hear you're talking about citizen 'doers'! I realize this may not be interesting to you or your listeners, but I thought I'd let you know that sixteen years ago I started a national prisoner reentry resource center called "Fair Shake" (www.fairshake.net).
In 2014, I created software, and today an 'app', which works exactly like the website, and is used in many institutions - state and federal. The website is a multi-stakeholder resource, too, so families, friends, employers, reentry professionals, corrections and citizens can find out how they can contribute to reentry success. It is completely free...including free from tracking. If you're interested in learning more, please reach out to me at sue@fairshake.net. Thanks so much for highlighting what individuals can do. For 25 years I have been told that what I do can't be done ~ : )
So interesting! It sounds like a win-win for everyone to help with reentry after imprisonment.
(If you can do such amazing software creation, then you may be the person who can design software for the "Getting Things Done"' (GTD) methodology of David Allen. Apparently many people tried for some time, and someone did approximate it, and it worked for about ten years, but I think not ideally. I'm not sure whether it is impossible to do, or whether there was a problem with the cost of doing it, but David Allen once long ago designed 19 screens to show what he believed was needed in such a program. Probably that needs to be updated now, since everything changes as practices shift to adjust to new realities. There is a world-wide community that would love love love to have software that precisely fits GTD, which is a very individualistic approach and needs to be quite customizable. There is an awful lot of software out there, and some is even designed for GTD, but apparently it is not what is needed. There's a real challenge for you, if you can do what people say can't be done).
Thanks for the info, Nancy! I tried to look up David Allen and Reentry but I did not find anything. If you find the slides or the program, I hope you'll share a link so I can check it out. My software/app is just the same as the website. It gives people inside the chance to use the tools and become familiar with the pages. but with no active links. In this way, the incarcerated folks can find resources (prisons, in general, offer no access to basic reentry resources), use the computer basics tutorial, and read virtual books in the libraries - to prepare for release. They can then reconnect to the active website - to request a copy of their birth certificate, or apply for a job, or locate a food pantry - when they are out.
I apologize, Sue. Apparently I gave you the impression that a connection exists between David Allen and reentry from prison projects. I did not intend to convey that message, and I know nothing about that. I appreciated the computer skills you expressed, and David Allen was interested in designing a software program especially for GTD, so I put those together and suggested you check that out.
David Allen is the person who developed the Getting Things Done (GTD) method of stress-free productivity and who wrote the book by that name. It might be worth a look because I cannot think of a better personal skill to learn for coping with life, which certainly could be helpful to prisoners reentering life outside.
You asked for links. I'm not sure that interests you now, but in case it does, the GTD book is available anywhere books are sold, including Amazon, if you want to check it out. Here is a link to an unofficial video that introduces GTD basics and seems pretty accurate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwvl5p77DTA
I checked out your web site, and it looks very helpful. I notice that you take pains to clarify how to navigate the site. It is nice to see that done because people are being left behind who have never had a computer, do not know how to use one, or cannot afford much technology and struggle to understand.
I was appalled to hear that people in prison who use your website are restricted from using active links to anything while in prison. It sounds like prisoners are limited to the resources you post on your website until they get out of prison, so what you offer can make a big difference.
Best wishes with this! Have you heard that Chris Hedges works with prisoners in a prison setting? I recall that the prisoners he worked with created and produced a play. He might have some useful suggestions. I hear that he is on substack.
Dear Ralph Nader, et al.
I have an inquiry not related to this episode, but something I think is important and would appreciate a response to, if you don’t mind (It is rather complicated to explain, so please bear with me. ).
Specifically, like all of you, I am convinced we cannot have a government of “We the People“ so long as corporations and the wealthy are allowed through Citizens United to dominate contributions to political campaigns by so-called independent expenditures.
The rub, however, is how we can end this ill without also outlawing unlimited independent expenditures from laudable citizen groups.
Unions, for instance, are allowed to independently support candidates with unlimited funds. “Our Revolution,” which Senator Sanders supports, is entitled to make unlimited independent expenditures. And, as I understand it, so are organizations such as Public Citizen.
So the question I need help with is this: How we can put an end to so-called unlimited funding through independent expenditures by corporations and billionaires without putting an end to unlimited independent expenditures by unions and citizen groups as well?
Banning corporate contributions, alone, won’t do the job if billionaire corporation owners, like Elon Musk, Miriam Adelson, and George Soros, can still independently spend unlimited funds in support of their chosen candidates. The Israel lobby will still control our government so long as human billionaires can fund it.
So how can repeal of CU be effectively achieved without throwing the baby out with the bathwater?
Sincerely,
Erik Thueson
Robert Weissman says the Deathocrats won't be able to undue what the Republikillers are doing until 2028. The last forty years have shown the Deathocrats will only campaign on doing what we want and need in 2026 and 2028 but will only do partial treating of symptoms without solving the problems.
The infrastructure bill is a perfect example. Weissman correctly described this as the most that has been done in history to deal with the War on Habitat. The problem is that it was also just a small part of what should have been done thirty plus years ago.
And that is the most the Deathocrats will actually do about anything in the next forty years as long as they are controlled by big money.
It is time for a discussion of Modern Political Theory. Rather than waste the next two election cycles perpetuating the failed approach of trying to get the big money Deathocrats to do what their corporate sponsors do not want them to do let's demand that politicians from any party do not take big money and enforce that demand with our votes in 2026 and 2028.
All the protests in the streets will just be a waste of time, treasure and effort if we vote for big money Deathocrats in the 2026 and 2028 elections.
It was voting for big money Deathocrats that gave us Trump. Let's not keep repeating the mistakes of the last forty years as it will only lead to someone even worse than Trump in the future.
You’re right that Weissman is probably a bit too optimistic about what a potential Democratic Party-led Congress and eventually the executive branch would mean. All evidence points towards the same, if not worse, foreign policy than what we’re seeing from the Republicans and domestic policy which might be better than what we’re seeing from the Republicans, but still incredibly neoliberal in nature.
Perhaps a Democratically-controlled Congress and presidency might be able to rollback some of Trump’s austerity, but I suspect they’ll never achieve, or try to achieve, even the levels of domestic policy we saw under the Biden administration and that was hardly a laudable period. The public will deem the Democratically-led period to be a failure, another Republican will take over and move things rightward and so the rightward drift never ends. It is the endless cycle of austerity and other right-wing behavior. I doubt the Democrats are really all that upset about any of this.
The Democrats may make restoring Medicaid part of their central platform. Even if they achieve that, and that is very iffy even if they have success in future elections, we’re still stuck with shoddy policy which was considered incomplete even in the 1960s when it was passed. Merely restoring Medicaid is hardly any great progressive accomplishment.
Health insurance is the culprit and not the budget cuts. Plenty of money in the budget for health care at competitive market prices, but not enough money for exorbitant bonuses for health care senior executives and not enough for the excessive dividends that shareholders want.
Lawyers are an economic tax on the public's rights.
Defund lawyers, judges, and legal systems. Get your country back.
Steve, thanks for the question about MMT and how it pertains to ‘the bill’. That said, I feel that the way Robert Weissman phrased things might still be confusing to the listeners.
I want to make one thing abundantly clear: ‘the bill’ cuts healthcare coverage *and* it cuts taxes for the wealthy. ‘The bill’ absolutely does not cut healthcare coverage *because* it cuts taxes for the wealthy.
Now, I know the latter is the common narrative spun by Democratic Party and progressive detractors, and perhaps also Republican supporters/detractors, but that should not be the case. That narrative is inherently neoliberal in nature. The Republicans could have maintained Medicaid and everything else while also formalizing the tax cuts. In fact, that’s pretty much the economic landscape since Trump I, and aside from the Covid lockdown era, the overall macroeconomic state of the country is stable even if has been more stable for the wealthy than the lower-income end. Hell, either party could have formalized the cuts and also increased healthcare spending and the macroeconomic state likely would be strong, if not stronger than before.
We need to be careful about these narratives. If increasing healthcare spending is the goal, and Weissman makes a good case for putting the focus on universal healthcare versus merely a return to the Medicaid status quo, the political focus has to be on healthcare itself and not on combining it with self-defeating tax increase narratives. We should never fall for neoliberal booby-traps in this regard.
Still, Steve, I’m pleased to see that you and Public Citizen are using more MMT-informed narratives. I hope to see this continue to grow, it is vitally important for all of us to achieve the goals we wish to see obtained and we all know Public Citizen is one of the most important groups working towards these progressive goals. Perhaps Public Citizen can reach out to the likes of Randy Wray and company to form some kind of economic committee to work on policy goals and framing.
On the tire recycling, I don't know why retreads are not more popular. Grinding up tires and using with the asphalt is not a positive solution as the microplastics just get more broken down and added to the air as car tires are the #1 source of microplastics in our environment which are highly toxic. I got replacement tires for my very high mileage Subaru for $50 each at a local junkyard, Cooper tires that were nearly new mounted and balanced. For $10 I found a local tire shop that took the used tires on the rim.
Any recycling of old tires is questionable with the crumb rubber and microplastics being a growing health hazard with many lawyers and lawsuits now popping up all over the internet for cancer victims due to PFAS toxins in the water etc.: https://tinyurl.com/2feupawm
There must be an incinerator that is able to burn trash without polluting anywhere near as much as shipping out garbage; as I understand it the toxic ash is the problem but the hotter the fire the less the toxic ash. Surely technology could work to burn without substantial toxins while fueling turbines to create electricity, etc..
Mr. Weissman is a very boring speaker; it's hard to see how he could be an effective leader of "Public Citizen".
“Mr. Weissman is a very boring speaker; it's hard to see how he could be an effective leader of "Public Citizen".”
I have qualms about certain statements made by Mr. Weissman, which I state in my standalone comment, but I did not find Mr. Weissman to be boring. If anything, Steve and David gave Weissman some rather technical questions and Weissman was simply answering them in an appropriate matter.
I appreciate Steve and David’s questions. I’ve said it before, but I find the RNRH to be more interesting when Steve, David, and Hannah are given a larger rôle in interviewing the guests and providing commentary. For one, I think the trio is more responsive to listener feedback than Mr. Nader is and each of the three generally ask informed, pertinent questions. Mr. Nader is often great at answering these questions when it is within Mr. Nader’s areas of expertise, which are numerous, but sometimes Mr. Nader’s questions seem more agenda-based rather than some of the more empirically-driven questions from the trio. I also feel that Mr. Nader sometimes addresses the RNRH audience at a ‘junior high education level’, like newspapers supposedly do, and this is quite disappointing for those looking for more sophisticated discourse similar to what I heard Mr. Nader offer years ago in his college guest lectures.
As Mr. Nader has said, having fire in the belly are requisites to fighting politically. Someone doing this work should not just have the passion of their principles but be energetic, tough-minded and forceful.
I just find it ironic that this country wants to build a dome to prevent missiles from reaching us, while it is clear that the destruction and eventually demise of the country is coming from within. If only we could build a dome against lack of empathy, imperialism, hubris and ignorance.
I am not convinced that our "enemies" would be so ridiculous and really try to attack us with missiles. as much as a lot of those countries are run by horrible people, the ones the US is afraid of - China, for example - are much better are envisioning something bigger. While we make enemies around the globe, China makes friends, builds things, invests in infrastructure to connect countries and regions. The reasons might be nefarious but they are not bombing and imposing their wishes by force and sanctions.
I have no trouble seeing how this all could end. Either the US self destroys and wither, or destroys the whole word.