วีดีโอ

An economist: a shill for big banks Not a bad rap. Here is a bailout for your AIG friends as a reward

❤❤❤❤❤❤

Really enjoyed this presentation. What happens to Chinas economy if the west stopped / banned trading with it? It kinda sounds like they have struck a lucky break to become the power they are If they mess with the west the west can end that.... maybe? the west suffers too, but China suffers much more. The gold price rising in moscows favour led me to think that. Like theyre economic model depends on being the factory of the world, in reality they are silly communists, just like the circus in the presentation

As ALFREDO from Argentina said, after finishing this book, Professor Mehrling needs to provide lectures from different points and angles. So he leaves for the ECONOMICS's huge directions and LOVELY views.

Text books in Money and Banking and Macroeconomics talk about "printing press" inflation or "debt-financing" and the public in business journalism, YT and blogs talk about "government printing money" -- but Ralph Hawtrey in his book "Currency and Credit" faced the everywhere else-neglected reality that banks lend their own credit as new deposit (a new bank liability) and are allowed to do so when they simultaneously obtain a signature of a borrower on a new IOU (a new bank asset, entered at present value). Today the gold standard is gone and all money defined as M2 money supply is deposit co-created with now debt entered in the bank's accounts as an asset equal to the newly created deposit, so the books balance. But of course the asset accrues by compounding interest as a stream of payments over time, so that the bank creates X but over the term of the loan it must be paid X plus sizable interest. But if all the money supply of all domestic markets is deposit co-created with a much larger debt obligation then there is an inescapable progression from stimulus to interest drain to the subtraction of the stimulus amount and then to subtraction of the full principal plus interest amount, that is, to deflation and defaults and transfer of assets from borrower-producer to creditor, the failed businesses ending up owned by one or other of the lender's holding companies, which is why blackrock is so big etc. Two things I offer your students to chew on. The depression was not a market phenomenon. It resulted when in 1925 exchequer Churchill gave the WWI creditors who lent in paper, a gigantic windfall bonanza for his class when he co verted all WWI debt loaned as paper off the gold standard into gold bonds payable in gold at the 1914 weight for the pound. Gigantic deflation for the British economy. The US made no such adjustment. John Kenneth Galbraith relates what Churchill ommitted from his inter-war-years memoires, that on the first of the three black days of October 1929 Winston Churchill, a guest of Bernard Baruch was in the visitors gallery of the NYSE -- and he saw the flood of sell signals. What Galbraith does not mention is that the sells were elicited by hundreds of margin calls forcing borrowers to liquidate to repay -- causing a chain reaction. Money was destroyed as reserves in banks were shrunk. The gallery was clised at noon and when the ti ker got behind by three hours, the Wall Street big shots started buying, knowing that as they bought the general public was selling its stock based on the delayed ticker information they were receiving. We learn that Baruch, Churchill's host, had shorted the market over the summer even as his public stztements were bullish on stock prices. The exact same sequence of margin calls, induced selloff, the galleries closed and the ticker behind was repeated on the subsequent two black days of October 1929. Sad but true. Hawtrey chose not to press the point. Keynes too was part of the plot to move economics away from Fisher-type analysis of debt and deflation and the German (Gottfried Feder) view of deliberate actions rather than impersonal market forces, expectations, butterfly effects etc. I do not know Dr. Glassner and I had no idea that Hawtrey still had a following among American academic economists. Maybe you could show this to him.

Top!

A new book with that outline would be so helpful 👍

ta da ta tatata ta. tada dada ta ta tata ta ta ta

Great presentation, we want more

A Federal Reserve Note is best defined as a promise to pay nothing in particular. What a dollar will purchase constantly changes (i.e., is subject to institutional changes, policy changes, and changes in public confidence in the stability of what the dollar will purchase).

One 20th century economist who understood the dynamic relationship between money creation, monetary policy and the cyclical character of a nation's asset markets (in particular the markets for land, natural resources and other natural assets having an inelastic supply) was Harry Gunnison Brown. Brown earned his Ph.D. at Yale under Irving Fisher.

Just read Sraffa. You haven't, of course. Too stupid and vain.

Living legend

Does anyone know how to access Perry Mehrling's PhD dissertation as mentioned in the video? It seems it's not published in print or online, except in Harvard Library's collection.

Awesome, one more interesting discussion. Thanks.

What is the role of luxury items in the trade with India over the years? Maybe traders can make huge profits by trading items that are not really 'needed'. Has this been important?

Promo_SM

We need to start thinking about the space in terms of a framework of blah blah blah blah blah haha!

So glad that I found this channel. I happened to know the MOOC in 2018 but only managed to finish it recently. Going through the course was an eye opening experience. Really look forward to reading the new book.

Excellent presentation and discussion. I found the channel only very recently and was immediately amazed by the content. Really looking forward to seeing further progress of theorizing of the money view.

This seems to be a duplicate of the Saturday paper presentations: th-cam.com/video/N0bCdB4n1xo/w-d-xo.html. Was this video supposed to be the papers presented on the Sunday?

I think "The Money View" would be a perfect title. Implies you're drawing attention to a perspective that mainstream economists aren't seeing (or, in most cases, refusing to).

Looking forward to the book!

Marxian economists aren't economists, regardless of what fancy degrees they have, they simply don't understand how the world works. An Indian told me that we the British "stole" some 45 trillions of dollars worth of wealth from India! Then he mentioned Utsa Patnaik. I immediately thought she was a Marxist because Marxists are easily predictable, they've a certain pattern of thinking, mostly distorted, false conspiracy theories that started with Marx himself and his hilarious ideological theories of values and labour, and the so called historical materialism. I was right, she's a radical Marxist who's embraced the hundreds of conspiracy theories that try to undermine the Western civilisation that's transformed the world and virtually eliminated poverty around the world. Hundreds of millions of Indians still have zero access to toilet today, year 2024. I guess that's because of the stolen "wealth"? Tea and what?! The percentage that has access to toilet in that country, mostly has no proper sewage systems, so cleaning the toilets (basically wholes in the ground) by hand is, still to this day, persistent. Utsa Patnaik, a Marxist with hilarious researches, would blame the capitalist democracies that modern India is fully dependent on. Extremely odd people the Marxists are, in fact have been throughout history.

The MMT idea that money gets some value through taxes being applied by the State is just hilariously funny. It assumes that value is something determined by the State when it is clearly not. If you disagree then just suppose there were no goods or services and describe why the government would even want to money collected from taxes which being unable to buy anything so would be worthless and rejected by the state itself like it was in Zimbabwe and the Weimar Republic where the State eventually refused payment in their own currency which had been inflated away to become worthless and unable for the State to provision itself with anything despite taxes being collected for the whole period.

Is there the third part of this workshop?

A set of conceptual tools that at least 90% of the population should not only have in their intellectual baggage (box) but also learn to incorporate them in their thought processing to debunk the capitalist myths.

why don't you just called yourself a Marxist and be done with this idiocy ? is it another form of sophism towards a new dialectic argument for something that does not and has not worked .. ever .. in human history? or are you just another red fascist?

In my opinion inflation depends on what money is employed to do.

There is no way for RCP1 / SSP1 scenarios. They would have needed actions before that were not there. Even in this @16:40 diagramm you can see that emissions should have fallen already, but instead they are still worsening. And of course, none of these scenarios are accounting any tipping elements that are already happening. As global society mankind has not made any real impacts against climate warming. And we are still worsening the situation every day.

Our emissions are around 60 billion tons of CO2e when all changes that mankind makes are counted in. 40 billion is just direct emissions.

We are at 1,5C (recent months). And perhaps whole year 2023. El Niño is still gathering its strenght, so it is likely that next year is even worse. A long term, 30-year trend, takes a bit longer. But we are really going rapidly past that temperature. We are not going under 1,5C with any current methods. It is almost impossible to stay even under 2C. We are ending well over 3C warming with current failing pledges (85% of them are failing, leading more likely over 4C temperature than under 3C). And current studies hints: Every 0,1C extra temperature rise kills 100 million people. (aka. 1000 tons of carbon to the air kills a person.) You may just guess when its your turn to die on this current path. We should try to avoid it with all means possible.

IPCC's "political summary" has to be agreed on all parties. That means the OIL PRODUCERS has the final saying on that. So in basics this leads to total failure, because parties are not doing what science says, but they are doing what wealth distrubution to the worst countries dictates. IPCC has large amounts of good science, but most of it is ruined with this political bias system. Also IPCC has made sure that there is fossil fuel firms lobbying in every corner of the process. This makes the decisions much worse for the environment and stabile climate. Even state briberies to fossil fuel companies are not cut.

4 degree IS ON THE PIPLEINE. Why? Governments have made these pledges, promises, to lessen their emissions. These were appointing toward 3,2C warming, more were produced to go around 2,8C. BUT now we have discovered that 85% of these pledges are not going to happen and some are pointing to the opposite direction. This means that our governments are willing to go well above these limits, meaning 3C is not the final limit, but over 4C is the LIKELY target. And further IPCC work against the efforts: Next COP is in oil producing country and led by oil CEO. Then we go to Australia that has just opened worlds largest coal mine. Do you really think that this kind of efforts are going to drop our emissions 8-10% per year? 50 year trend, after multiple scientific warnings, the emissions are at the worst level ever. And oil demand is also at the worst level. There is no signs that this will change in the timeline that we have. We are trending along worst case scenario. Actually 2019, just before Covid shutdowns, our emissions were around 10% HIGHER than the worst case scenario. And after Covid we have came back on this trend. We have means to divert from this devastative trend, but there is no will or leadership that really does it. Still over 80% of our energy demand is filled with fossil burning. So, please stop making this issue more positive than it is.

Church!

Thank you so much Dr. Sachs.

Hahaha. .."recovering from Kohvidd...hahaha. BS!

Patnaik. on Money

The presentation on Trophic Coherence is amazing work.

Jeff♥CONFUCIUS/MENCiUS♥HONG KONG（♥ER）need your ADVICE on ♥DEMOCRACY♥,,RUINED since 2019,HK is the （♦VICTIM of US）♦20230823,US ,is RUINING CHINA （♦ECONOMY）in 360°♥CHINA needs JEFFRY'S （♥ADVICE）to GET OUT of CATASTROPHE ,Ergonomically ,POLICALLY❤KINDLY HELP CHINA♥

Promo'SM

45:00 John Stuart Mills approach of argumentation, not solving a model, we're providing a census. which is the a roll of an economist in policies to provide census policies of economists or social scientists with different views. 33:18, concentrate on the science and data, do away with departments and focus on boarder conversations in all social science disciplines.

Joe, give my article a cite (for a poor chap) I wrote “black swan -or- black boxes economics”

Dude finally realized he was underemployed at Credit Suisse.

Wonderful thoughts! The beginning of a new beginning, and more questions await, for those hungry for a new kind of hope!

You old lady, you LIED about the 45 trillion the britishers stole from India That figure of 45 trillion dollars is made by a a Marxist economist UTSA Patnaik who used 5% interest rate to compound the loot taken by britishers which is a a false method as the inflation rate in 1950s were 3.68% interest rate. Also the amount of loot in the inaccurate method was 9 trillion which was converted to dollars multiplied by 4.68, you can checking in her article so don’t be deceived by the false number. IM SORRY FOR MY INDIAN BROTHERS AND I WILL NOT DENY THE ATROCITIES WE DID IN YOUR COUNTRY BUT WE DID NOT STEAL 45 TRILLION THE REAL FIGURE IS ABOUT 2TRILLION

Thank you!

This demonstrates the importance of diversification and having a concrete understanding of a certain asset for investors considering this recent global economic crisis. Likewise, how important it is to seek professional counsel.

Prof Jeffrey Sachs puts the complicated world problems and solutions in a simple way which I hope politicians can understand. Indeed peace is necessary for all to achieve sustainable development.

Ethic and economic are antinomic. If you didn't understand that, then you are still in the age of dreams.