Moderate Rebels has the podcast Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire with economist Michael Hudson.

Economist Michael Hudson discusses the update of his book “Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire” and the financial motivations behind the US new cold war on China and Russia.

Hudson has published a new, third edition of his book Super Imperialism that updates his analysis for the 21st century, discussing the new cold war on China and Russia and the ongoing transition from a US dollar-dominated financialized system to a “multipolar de-dollarized economy.”

Hudson explains how the strategy of US economic hegemony has evolved since World War One.

I have read this book recently. This interview gets to the heart of the book rather well. The only thing more I would like to hear is a discussioin of how Modern Money Theory (MMT) relates to this discussion. Michael Hudson is also a strong proponent of MMT. However, MMT focuses on the independence of a country that is sovereign in its own currency. The USA has the strongest monetary soevereignty that there is, yet “Super Imperialism” discusses the arm twisting the USA has to do to make it sovereignty stick in the international theater. I would like to hear Michael Hudosn address these aspects in a single interview.

Forthright Media has posted the audio Ray McGovern – Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity – Russia & Ukraine.

Ray McGovern earned a Masters’ degree with honors in Russian Language, Literature and History from Fordham University. In the early 1960s, he served as a US Army Infantry Intelligence Officer in the analysis division on Soviet foreign policy, especially with respect to China and Indochina, which includes Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, and Thailand.

I haven’t heard Ray McGovern’s analysis of the Ukraine situation before, but I have listened to him many times on related and unrelated topics. He always sounds very reasonable and knowledgeable.

Michael Hudson has the post The Dollar Devours the Euro.

It is now clear that today’s escalation of the New Cold War was planned over a year ago. America’s plan to block Nord Stream 2 was really part of its strategy to block Western Europe (“NATO”) from seeking prosperity by mutual trade and investment with China and Russia.

This sounds dire. I have built up a lot of trust in Michael Hudson, but not quite enough to put my investment money where his predictions are. Actually, I suppose I do have some hedge investments that should serve me in case these predictions come true.

Matt Stoller has the Substack article The Secret Plot To Unleash Corporate Power.

There aren’t that many actual conspiracies in politics, but this is a real one. In 1980, influential thinkers advising the incoming Reagan administration were trying to figure out how to repeal antitrust laws and unleash unfettered monopoly power. They realized that repealing the law outright would be unpopular, and that Congress wouldn’t like it. So they decided to repeal the antitrust laws, de facto, by doing it quietly through administrative action.

I keep trying to make people aware of this. Now Matt Stoller has assembled a nice article that does the job.

Scott Ritter has written the Consortium News article Russia, Ukraine & the Law of War: Crime of Aggression.

When it comes to the legal use of force between states, it is considered unimpeachable fact that in accordance with the intent of the United Nations Charter to ban all conflict, there are only two acceptable exceptions. One is an enforcement action to maintain international peace and security authorized by a Security Council resolution passed under Chapter VII of the Charter, which permits the use of force.

The other is the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense, as enshrined in Article 51 of the Charter,…

I have heard him explain this in interviews, but I have not read this article, yet. I want to post it here so I won’t lose track of it.

Intereconomics has the article Modern Monetary Theory: The Right Compass for Decision-Making.

MMT is, first and foremost, a balance sheet approach to macroeconomics.

This is a limitation of MMT. A balance sheet is a snapshot of the economy in time. A succession of balance sheets may seem like a dynamic description, but physicists call this a “quasi static” approximation. It may or may not be a good model of a dynamic system. A bank lending money has a borrower’s IOU to balance out the transaction. However, the time between taking out a mortgage and the 30 years before it has been paid back, there are a lot of economic consequences that occurred from a transaction that balanced out to zero all that time.

Surely, the Greek government, surpassing 200% of public debt to GDP in 2021, would be in for a repeat of the euro crisis. It did not happen. As we all know by now, a government cannot run out of its own money for technical reasons.

Greece is not sovereign in its own money. Greece uses the Euro which it cannot create in the way the USA Fed creates the dollar. Putting the above excerpt in this article, does not give me great confidence.

MMT sees the purchase of government bonds by the central bank as an asset swap.

This is how Sophocles got himself in trouble by abusing syllogisms. Every purchase of something is an asset swap, money for the item purchased. There are other kinds of asset swaps that are not like money for items. when someone jumps to another conclusion by asserting that buying bonds is “just” an asset swap, then you should wonder to yourself how this transaction may differ from other asset swaps.

Can you take a USA Treasury security to the grocery store to buy a loaf of bread? If not, there must be something different between money and a USA Treasury security.

In fact, a bank loan is “just” an asset swap. The bank gives you money and you give them a promise to pay it back. Unlike the USA Fed, you cannot redeem your IOU with another IOU. The bank expects monthly payments in real USA money, not promises of money.

In general, I believe that MMT is a good, but not perfect, description of the economy. As someone who made a living from writing software that modeled integrated circuits, I was a firm believer in understanding the limitations of your model. A model is not real life, or you wouldn’t call it a model. Some day, I will read the rest of the referenced article because I have other quibbles with MMT that could stand some examination.

Stephanie Kelton’s The Lens has the post A Free Lunch for Me, but Not for Thee.

An ill-reasoned take on MMT

Finally MMT proponents address why we have inflation now, but not before. I already had this figured out months ago, so I am not surprised. I wonder how many people just took the observation that the Fed was creating money like mad without creating inflation to mean there were no circumstances where there could be inflation. I warned MMT proponents to explain exactly why there was no inflation before, and why there might be inflation under other circumstances. They essentially told me to shut up. Why was I concentrating on explaining why there was no inflation. I could see the cause and anticipate the change, but you cannot wake people up until disaster happens. I know this “I told you so” will not win me any friends. I also know that the next time I have to warn people, they will pay me no heed. At least I try to protect myself from the disasters I can foresee. I can only have sympathy for those who can’t see what’s coming.

Naked Capitalism has the video Joe Lauria Interviews Michael Hudson and Richard Wolff on Consortium News.

And I’m sure what it brings with that, is all that voters can do is keep throwing throwing the rascals out of power. But they’re the same rascals, basically. So the United States doesn’t seem to have much of an opportunity to have a real alternative.

Money on the Left has the podcast The ECASH Act with Rohan Grey.

In this special episode, Rohan Grey (@rohangrey) joins Billy Saas (@billysaas) and Maxximilian Seijo (@MaxSeijo) to discuss the “ECASH” or “Electronic Currency and Secure Hardware” Act. Introduced by Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA-08), Chair of the House Committee on Financial Services’ Task Force on Financial Technology, and based on Grey’s research on electronic currency, the ECASH Act directs the Secretary of the Treasury to develop and pilot digital dollar technologies that replicate the privacy-respecting features of physical cash.

This is a wonderful concept that I had not known about until this podcast. I had been thinking that government sponsored digital cash could look like a credit or debit card, but this conversation carries the idea way beyond that.

Popular Resistance has the post Michael Hudson: US Dollar Hegemony Ended Abruptly Last Wednesday.

On Wednesday, March 23, 2022, the United States announced that it would freeze Russia’s access to its gold. Russia has the fifth highest amount of gold in the world. Economist Michael Hudson explains that this action, which follows the US seizing Venezuela and Afghanistan’s gold and assets, has effectively ended dollar hegemony, which has been in decline in recent years, and the free ride that the US has enjoyed abroad.

The Michael Hudson part starts at 28 minutes into the audio. As a follower of Modern Monetary Theory, I am pleased that Michael Hudson straightened out the seeming paradox between what Hudson wrote in this book “Super imperialism” and the rest of his writings about MMT.

Where the financing of USA deficits comes in is in our foreign trade. The deficit does not finance domestic trade. Except for Michael Hudson and Fadhel Kaboub, most MMT proponents have not talked about the foreign trade implications of MMT.