Not BE Reread, yet it IS! (isn't it)

Fri Nov 12 20:56:57 UTC 2021

Um…

1. A “hot” economy doesn’t translate into global warming. *That sounds like
something Ted Cruz might say in a speech to idiots*. Now THAT you might
call a put down.

2.  Would you rather that we have a “cold” economy (in order to slow global
warming?)?

3.  If you want to make “usury” QE into an evil, deceptive force that’s
causing us to all see our hard-earned household safety and money melt away
from our fingers, then *what monetary strategy would you have implemented
to try to claw back from the COVID recession which was greater than the
2008 Great Recession?*

David Morris

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 3:22 PM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> Just want it to be clear that I am not opposed to  paper money  at all.
> The real issue for me  is putting usury and the financial industry  backed
> by fossil fuels/petrodollars and the war industry at t he center of the
> economy. The result may indeed be what David Morris’s reference calls a hot
> economy , but it is a heat that is all too real and is burning down  the
> biosphere.  Numbers are not the same as  breathable air, safe temperatures,
> clean water, food and shelter and friendship and music making. All the
> zeroes and ones in the universe do not add up to life. When your money that
> you worked just as hard for this week as last is losing value in almost
> every area, that is inflation. and that comes from an imbalance between
> dollars and real stuff.
>   The fossil fuel companies contiue to get government support even as they
> dump billions of tons of waste material into air and ground that they are
> stealing from the earth and her people for use as a toxic waste dump.
>
> > On Nov 12, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Richard Romeo <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think much the same, Joseph. The fossil fuel industry are nations unto
> themselves. And I’m not sure any President has much sway over them if we
> still have renewable energy still in its young adulthood and with nuclear
> in and out and back in of the picture.
> > I don’t think of QE as good or bad, just another tool in the toolbox to
> spur economic growth in times of lackluster economic trends.
> > But the US does still have the advantage of the dollar containing to be
> the global base currency and we can tweak here and there
> > I don’t see anyone going back to the gold standard. Money has been let
> loose. I can’t see how that genie gets back in the bottle. It’s so
> intertwined in the global economy now.
> > I think all this ties into the irrelevance of nation states. Sure we
> have borders but money doesn’t.
> > With that said, The US still has flexibility and control over its
> economy and currency. But it’s not a given with the current dysfunction,
> cynicism and corruption in the US today.
> > The US does need to invest in its infrastructure and in social programs.
> Which will benefit on many different levels, personal social and political.
> But not with the current leadership as is, much of it on the Republican
> side. It was bad enough when Reagan said govt was the problem; it’s gone
> way past that now. But we need govt to work. I’m not keen on Weimar
> comparisons but the hollowing out of effective governance is pretty clear
> >
> > rich
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 12, 2021, at 1:56 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Apologies for name fumble. too many commentators out there. My main
> point is I am highly dubious Biden will be seriously challenging the US
> fossil fuel industry in any substantive way.  I could certainly prove wrong
> but things don’t look good to me. Agree not relevant to BE. Not that
> important.
> >>
> >>> On Nov 12, 2021, at 10:30 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> It isn't Ignatious, it's Yglesias and his point is not about all
> that....
> >>>
> >>> Biden has already changed some of the dynamics....
> >>>
> >>> Otherwise, I'm not engaging since this is a good BE Read and
> everyone's interpretative analyses may differ.
> >>>
> >>>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 10:21 AM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net
> <mailto:brook7 at sover.net>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> define “imaginary money.”
> >>> Basically when money is released into circulation that has no
> corresponding economic growth/new value. Many economists from different
> political positions and economic biases have questioned the benefits of
> Quantitative Easing as a solution to any and every sign of economic
> faltering. Already China and other countries are pulling away from the
> dollar  and Tbills as overvalued.  Tying up metals as markers of wealth
> seems like a waste of gold, silver, whatever as highly useful and
> decorative material. But people  around the world buy gold against
> inflation and it works pretty well. Also indebting the tax base to ever
> increasing military budgets is draining value from currency at a time when
> ecological threats far far outweigh military threats.  Passive solar houses
> and business buildings are a far better hedge against inflation than
> truckloads of high tech weapons that lose wars.  Locally grown food and
> locally made necessities the best hedge agains attenuated  fossil fuel
> dependent supply lines.
> >>>
> >>> IMO Ignatius is fantasizing if he thinks Biden is going to challenge
> the oil companies. Look at COP; look at the pipelines. The dollar = oil.
> >>> Food is grown with fossil fuels, delivered with fossil fuels, wrapped
> in fossil fuels and converted into debt measured in fossil fuels.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> On Nov 12, 2021, at 9:12 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com
> <mailto:fqmorris at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Please define “imaginary money.”
> >>>>
> >>>> Like, as opposed to gold or something?
> >>>>
> >>>> I can’t wait for this…
> >>>>
> >>>> David Morris
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 8:54 AM Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net
> <mailto:brook7 at sover.net> <mailto:brook7 at sover.net <mailto:
> brook7 at sover.net>>> wrote:
> >>>> Maybe not price gouging but when goverment pumps tons of imaginary
> money into the economy it starts to lose value. Quantitative Easing was the
> phrase.
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 12, 2021, at 7:12 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com
> <mailto:mark.kohut at gmail.com> <mailto:mark.kohut at gmail.com <mailto:
> mark.kohut at gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Love in the Time of Web3, Pynchon is smiling when he saw that....
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias>
> <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias>>>
> >>>>> Matthew Yglesias
> >>>>> @mattyglesias
> >>>>> <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias>
> <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias>>>
> >>>>> ·
> >>>>> 12m <https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1459126609521295389 <
> https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1459126609521295389> <
> https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1459126609521295389 <
> https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1459126609521295389>>>
> >>>>> Agree with Robinson — you can’t take the politics out of politics!
> Biden
> >>>>> should also investigate price-gouging and anti-competitive behavior
> by
> >>>>> retail gas stations and have the FTC ask if cartel-like behavior by
> oil
> >>>>> company shareholders is restraining supply.
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l> <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l> <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l <
> https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>