Naked Capitalism has the article Worrying About the Deficit Is So 17th Century.

Such was the origin of that debt which has since become the greatest prodigy that ever perplexed the sagacity and confounded the pride of statesmen and philosophers. At every stage in the growth of that debt the nation has set up the same cry of anguish and despair. At every stage in the growth of that debt it has been seriously asserted by wise men that bankruptcy and ruin were at hand. Yet still the debt went on growing; and still bankruptcy and ruin were as remote as ever.

It is fun to just rule out the possibility of inflation, but then people bring up historical inflation that did occur. Then you have to explain what is the difference between situations where inflation occurred and situations where it did not occur. That’s when you can have a conversation about reality. However, by then you may have lost the trust of your audience because you didn’t admit to inflation right from the start. The comments at the end of the article take care of discussing the conditions that create inflation as opposed to those that do not cause inflation.

Yves Smith
June 7, 2018 at 2:15 pm

That is not correct. To get hyperinflation, you need significant loss or destruction of a country’s productive capacity and foreign currency obligations you can’t meet.

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/04/what-are-the-preconditions-for-hyperinflation.html

New York Magazine has the article Democrats Must Reject Howard Schultz and His Radical Centrist Ideology.

In recent interviews, Schultz has argued that progressive Democrats have grown so rigidly ideological, they can no longer recognize basic political and policy realities.

He has also contended that the wealthiest nation in human history can’t afford to provide public health insurance to all of its citizens; that the national debt is a bigger threat to the United States than climate change; and that Democrats would be wise to demonstrate “leadership” to the electorate — by calling for cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

Good article. I just wish the author would take the problem of inflation more seriously. There are plenty of reasons why inflation is not a worry if we behave rationally, but those rational requirements should be addressed. Deficits, per se, are not the problem, but how they get spent makes all the difference in the world. A strong military depends on a strong economy. In the long run, a strong economy can be undermined by too much concentration on spending for the military. Investing money that creates more value than it consumes will help keep our economy strong.

Inflation is not so much of a problem as long as we have the currency that is the reserve currency of the world. We can destroy our currency’s standing in the world by using economic sanctions as a weapon of foreign policy. Engaging in trade wars is another way we can undermine our economy and our currency.

Free trade is a better policy than trade wars, but it needs to be free trade that promotes the welfare of people, not exclusively the welfare of oligarchs. Unlike the defunct TPP proposal of the Obama/Clinton administration, it should not give corporations the power to override a nation’s ability to rein in corporate excess. This power is used to further the maldistribution of income and wealth. This poor distribution leads to world political instability which does not promote the welfare of non-defense industries. Defense industries that produce products that destroy themselves and destroy people and the world’s productive capacity are not the type of investment that leads to a healthy world and healthy economy.

YouTube has the video Gar Alperovitz: What Is A New Economy?

Professor Gar Alperovitz discusses the New Economy movement and cooperative experiments in the U.S. Interview was made in July 24th, 2014 (Washington D.C.) by Antti Jauhiainen & Joona-Hermanni Mäkinen (Parecon Finland).

I may very well have this same story buried in other posts about Gar Alperovitz, but it doesn’t hurt to have this distillation posted. I like the way that he emphasizes this example’s appeal to conservatives who have a visceral dislike to anything that smacks of socialism.

The Institute For New Economic Thinking has the article Jim Chanos on Fraud: “Cryptocurrency Is a Security Speculation Game Masquerading as a Technological Breakthrough”. This has been republished by Naked Capitalism..

Law was the first person to write about the need for foreign governments to have fiat currencies and not be tethered to gold and silver. Because of the power of taxation and the power of the governments through enforcement and force of arms, they could enforce their currency to be used, and because of their ability to expand the monetary base and do all the kinds of things that central banks now do, it was in their best interest to do so.

I gave a link to both publications of this article so that you could read the comments on both of them. What Jim Chanos is saying is plenty controversial. I picked out the quote above to give you a hint at one of the controversies. To a proponent of Modern Money Theory (MMT) like me, the comments on fiat currency seem pretty devastating. At least I can say that I recognize some of what night upset MMT for the USA, see my recent post India & Iran drop dollar in oil trade to bypass US sanctions – report.

As for Jim Chanos’ comments

LP: One thing you said in “The China Hustle” is that we’ve never seen a credit build-up like the one we’ve seen in China today that hasn’t been followed by a major financial crisis. That sounds pretty worrisome.

JC: I’m always told confidently it won’t matter because they owe it to themselves. Well, if that was that were the case, then Zimbabwe would be one of the wealthiest countries in the world today!

When MMT makes this argument about the USA’s fiat currency, they say that the fiat currency allows the USA to buy whatever it wants to buy if it is for sale in the USA’s currency. What is available to buy in USA currency is a far different story from what is available to buy in Zimbabwe currency. However, the caveat that MMT states is something to take seriously. My recent post about India and Iran as linked to above demonstrates some of the things that could go wrong with the USA fiat cirrency.

YouTube has the video Bernie Yells At Chuck Todd, Stunned By Stupid Question: “Of Course Not!”.

Do you think #45 is making it up when he talks about “fake news”? See my previous post Why Trump Attacks The Media.

YouTube has the video Bernie Sanders: Koch Brothers trying to destroy unions in America.

The Koch brothers and other right-wing groups are trying to destroy unions in America, and that’s exactly what the Janus Supreme Court case is about.

I think that crunch time has finally arrived. Is it likely that there will be fair coverage of this from the corporate media? I bet the corporate oligarchs had wished they had gotten rid of net neutrality before this was put on the internet.

Bernie Sanders’ organization posted a video on Facebook – Why Trump Attacks The Media.

Donald Trump explained to a reporter why he constantly attacks the media. What he said should make us all very concerned.

If the corporate media did not only give us the oligarch’s party line, then they would not be so vulnerable to what Trump is doing. There used to be diversity in the media because of diversity of ownership. Our country has allowed the concentration of media ownership to about 6 major players. There used to be a fairness doctrine for usage of the public airwaves for broadcasting news. That was done away with by Ronald Reagan, and has just made worse in succeeding administrations,

The internet gives us a unique opportunity to learn about the bias in the corporate media. That is why net neutrality is under attack by these corporations. There is also a concerted effort to get the big corporations in control of the internet to censor what others are allowed to write that exposes the bias.

It is dangerous for people like Bernie Sanders, a supposed voice of reason, to ignore the real dangers in the way we get our controlled news. Considering what the press did to Sanders’ run for the Presidency, and the fact that he criticizes the press for the way they cover politics, how can he pretend that some of what Donald Trump says about the press is not true? Bernie Sanders seems to be ignoring the fact that a lot of what you hear on corporate news is fake news. I have been calling one particular news channel “Faux Noise” for years before Donald Trump ever thought about running for President.

One trouble with attacking everything that Trump says without discrimination is that the people who do it lose their credibility and destroy the credibility of progressives in general.

C-SPAN has the video After Words with Jerome Corsi.

Journalist Jerome Corsi argued that there is an effort to thwart the presidency of Donald J. Trump. He is interviewed by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson.

From my prior readings from and about Jerome Corsi, and what I know about infowars.com, I consider him to be a prototypical right-wing nut. If it had not been for the recommendation of another progressive Facebook acquaintance, I never would have listened to this interview.

As I listened to the interview, I kept teetering back and forth between the judgment of right-wing nut and agreeing with some of what he said.

It is interesting to hear his thoughts on the Deep State from a conservative’s point of view. The progressive/left has similar complaints about the deep state, but feel it is after them. I have reconciled these similar views coming from opposite sides as recognizing that the deep state does not necessarily favor either conservatives or progressives, The deep state holdovers just care about preserving the welfare of some corporate oligarchs who only care about enriching themselves.

On my own, I have been recognizing for some time that there is a Deep State vendetta against Trump. Many of my progressive friends accuse me of being a supporter of Trump just because I can recognize what is being done to him and the complicity of the corporate press. I keep saying that just because you are pretty sure that Trump lies a lot, don’t presume that all the forces that are fighting him are telling you the truth.

My latest fight is against the Democrats like Rep. Adam Schiff, who says he sees no evidence that the government under Obama put a spy in the Trump campaign. When I present my evidenc by giving people the link to a previous blog post, The FBI Informant Who Monitored the Trump Campaign, Stefan Halper, Oversaw a CIA Spying Operation in the 1980 Presidential Election, they resort to calling me names. The Republicans who want to refute what I say about the spy in the Trump campaign would like to engage me in a discussion of how an informant is different from a spy. To believe this argument is useful requires you to believe that the FBI claim for inserting the “informant” is completely honest without the possibility of the ulterior motives that they deny.

If I have both my friends and enemies taking me to task, maybe I am actually onto something.

YouTube has the video ‘Russia-US direct conflict in Syria was close, but avoided’ – Assad to RT (EXCLUSIVE).

Whether you believe him, don’t believe him, want to believe him, or don’t want to believe him, it might be worthwhile to hear what he thinks, or even pretends to think if you are really skeptical.

RT has the story India & Iran drop dollar in oil trade to bypass US sanctions – report.

India will reportedly pay for Iranian oil in rupees as the two countries seek to bypass the US economic pressure on Tehran, industry officials have told the Sputnik news agency.

As a proponent of Modern Money Theory, I recognize that the policy freedom the USA has has a lot to do with the fact that our currency is a world reserve currency, Our use of economic sanctions to get our way politically drives others to stop using the USA currency as a reserve currency. This is something that jeopardizes our very economy which is our source of strength.