{"id":21716,"date":"2015-09-15T08:31:14","date_gmt":"2015-09-15T12:31:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/?p=21716"},"modified":"2015-09-15T09:45:32","modified_gmt":"2015-09-15T13:45:32","slug":"its-not-the-deficit-stupid","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/2015\/09\/15\/its-not-the-deficit-stupid\/","title":{"rendered":"It&#8217;s Not The Deficit, Stupid!"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><em>New Economic Perspectives<\/em> has the article <a href=\"http:\/\/neweconomicperspectives.org\/2015\/09\/corbynomics-101-its-the-deficit-stupid.html\" target=\"_blank\" title=\"New Economic Perspectives article\">Corbynomics 101\u2014It\u2019s the Deficit, Stupid!<\/a><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nAs anyone who\u2019s followed the discussion has seen, the proposal from the newly-elected leader of the British Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn, to implement \u201cPeople\u2019s Quantitative Easing\u201d or <a href=\"http:\/\/ftalphaville.ft.com\/2015\/08\/06\/2136475\/corbyns-peoples-qe-could-actually-be-a-decent-idea\/\" target=\"_blank\">PQE<\/a>, has created a lot of controversy (Richard Murphy\u2019s <a href=\"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/\" target=\"_blank\">blog<\/a> is a good place to see the PQE defense against these arguments).&nbsp; The basics of the proposal are that the government would create a public bank for financing infrastructure (National Investment Bank, or NIB), which the Bank of England (BoE) would then lend to directly in order to fund. &nbsp;The NIB would then carry out infrastructure projects to jumpstart the economy, create public capital, and create jobs.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Maybe this <em>New Economic Perspectives<\/em> article would be better titled &#8220;It&#8217;s Not The Deficit, Stupid!&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Here is an example of what Bernie Sanders could do if he managed to figure out how to get the public to understand this.<\/p>\n<p>Notice the mention in the article of Stephanie Kelton whom Sanders brought in as chief economist for the Democrats on the Senate Budget Committee.  &#8220;Stephanie Kelton termed it, Overt Monetary Financing of Government (OMFG)&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The details of the article are enough to make a CPA&#8217;s eyes glaze over, but the mere knowledge that something like  \u201cPeople\u2019s Quantitative Easing\u201d or PQE has been proposed somewhere is very important.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p>To put this PQE in context, note that <em>The Wall Street Journal<\/em> has the article <a href=\"http:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/price-tag-of-bernie-sanders-proposals-18-trillion-1442271511\" target=\"_blank\">Price Tag of Bernie Sanders\u2019s Proposals: $18 Trillion<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Stephanie Kelton <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/stephaniekelton\/status\/242418994383052801\" target=\"_blank\">tweeted<\/a> in Sep 2012<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nRandy Wray says #Fed intervention approx. $29 Trillion. #Bernanke says Fed created 2 million #jobs. Translation: $14.5 million per job.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><em>Econo Monitor<\/em> published the  L. Randall Wray December 14th, 2011 article <a href=\"http:\/\/www.economonitor.com\/lrwray\/2011\/12\/14\/the-29-trillion-bail-out-a-resolution-and-conclusion\/\" target=\"_blank\">The $29 Trillion Bail-Out: A Resolution and Conclusion<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>So Corby&#8217;s calling his program PQE to emphasize the similarity to the FED&#8217;s QE, makes it reasonable to compare <em>The Wall Street Journal<\/em> &#8216;s estimate of $19 Trillion for Bernie Sanders program to the $29 Trillion of the FED&#8217;s QE.  Remember that the estimate on the FED&#8217;s spending was made before December 2011.  By now the total is probably higher.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>New Economic Perspectives has the article Corbynomics 101\u2014It\u2019s the Deficit, Stupid! As anyone who\u2019s followed the discussion has seen, the proposal from the newly-elected leader of the British Labor Party, Jeremy Corbyn, to implement \u201cPeople\u2019s Quantitative Easing\u201d or PQE, has created a lot of controversy (Richard Murphy\u2019s blog is a good place to see the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[166],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-21716","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-stevegsposts","7":"czr-hentry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21716","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21716"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21716\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21723,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21716\/revisions\/21723"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21716"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21716"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ssgreenberg.name\/PoliticsBlog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21716"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}