This fell out of the Q & A, I mentioned in my previous post, The Question I Wanted to Ask.

Greenspan: “There is nothing to prevent the government from creating as much money as it wants.” – COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MARCH 2, 2005

What is so shocking about this is that even Alan Greenspan acknowledges the truth of Modern Money Theory (MMT). It’s a good thing nobody is listening or we would be hearing the sounds of heads exploding all across the country.

Or as was mentioned the subject of my previous post:

Watching Stephanie Kelton guide the conversation, sitting next to Bernie Sanders as she was, it was clear the delicate challenge she faces in poking at the edges of the precepts of the status quo without pushing things into the scary and marginalized territory of counter-intuitive reality.

That counter-intuitive reality was accidentally revealed by Alan Greenspan. The problem is that if Bernie Sanders ever mentions it, he will be dismissed as more of a kook than some people already suspect he is. To set the record straight, Bernie Sanders is not a kook.

Perhaps the safest route for Bernie Sanders to take is to keep saying that we need to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for his programs. After all, it is true that we have to raise the taxes on the wealthy to solve the problem of the maldistribution of wealth and power in this country. What harm could it do to also pretend these taxes are needed to pay for Sanders’ program?

One of the life lessons I have learned is that it always comes back to bite you when you use a little fiction to explain something that is actually true.

Luckily, there are few of the people who can’t handle the truth that will be reading this blog post. So they won’t be up-in-arms over what I have revealed here.

New Economic Perspectives has the post The Question I Wanted to Ask by “J.D. Alt”.

I recently attended a panel discussion called by Bernie Sanders—and moderated by Stephanie Kelton—to discuss the crisis in Greece.
.
.
.
“Does it strike anyone as odd that the discussion today has been only about money? Is it important at all what the real resources are that Greeks have within their own borders? Is it rational for Greece to borrow money in order to buy things the Greek people already own by right—their own labor, their own agriculture, for example? Or is it the case that Greece is so lacking in her own resources that she has to buy most everything her citizens consume from other countries? And, if that’s true, isn’t at least part of the solution for Greece to intentionally and systematically become more self-sufficient? Isn’t it possible, in fact, that if every nation strived intentionally to become more self-sufficient in food and energy—go “off-grid” so-to-speak—that a great chunk of the anthropogenic CO2 (which is threatening our very survival) would be eliminated? Or is the globalization of capital a more important goal than the well-being of seven billion people?”

I am sure that all followers of Modern Money Theory (MMT) have this very question on their minds.

This “J.D. Alt” post and the ensuing Q & A raise so many interesting issues, that I want to write several blog posts of my own about those issues.

As long as we are on the headline title of the post, this is a good place to interject the question I would like to ask.

How does MMT account for the Mark-to-Market method of valuing just about everything? An example of what I am talking about is that when there is one trade of a stock on the stock market, everybody who owns any shares of that company assumes that their individual shares are suddenly worth that price.

Their behavior on how they spend or save their money is quite tightly correlated to how much they think they have. Mark-to-market is as fictitious as they come (although there aren’t necessarily any better measures), so here is a perfect example of “money” being created exogenously from all the sectors that MMT enumerates.

I have asked this before, but I have yet to receive an answer. In case you don’t recognize the relevance of the question, this is tightly tied to the idea of sector balances mentioned in several comments. The mark-to-market issue is the one fly in the ointment that seems to be ignored by MMT in its discussion of sector balances.

Massachusetts for Bernie Sanders has refocused attention on the Occasional Planet article of December 2014, Elizabeth Warren: Citibank owns Obama administration.

Senator Elizabeth Warren spoke on the floor of the Senate on Dec. 12, 2014 about the provision that Citigroup added to the omnibus budget package.

I don’t know what it will take for this message to finally get through. Both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren (and their supporters) are trying as hard as we can to reach the voters with the truth about what their representatives are doing to them.

When will enough truly be enough?

I received an email over Barack Obama’s “signature”. Note the warning below. I wouldn’t want to be responsible for a mass epidemic of vomiting. So only contemplate doing this if you have a very strong stomach.

I almost forgot to mention that this will be hosted and broadcast by Faux Noise. I hate to suggest anything that will boost the ratings of that propaganda channel.

Ring of Fire Radio has the commentary Comcast Orders MSNBC To Remove Anti-TPP Hosts.

When it comes to coverage of the Trans Pacific Partnership, no one in the corporate media covered the issue more than Ed Schultz on MSNBC’s The Ed Show. When it was announced last week that they were pulling the plug on his program, they effectively killed the only national voice that was talking about the disaster of a trade deal on cable news.

But what is the real reason for MSNBC dumping Ed? When you dig down, it’s dirtier than you would think.

I had no idea of the real reason why these changes have been made. I just thought that Progressives didn’t have the stomach for media aimed at them that was a mirror image of the stuff aimed at the regressives.

The mention of Bill Clinton’s support for media conglomeration was something that I had forgotten about. I thought it was all Reagan’s fault for doing away with the fairness doctrine.

Now you have a deeper understanding of the attack these companies have been making on net neutrality. The internet is the last bastion that has held out against the silencing of Progressive voices. I wonder when I will get shut down.