Does the Federal Well Have No Bottom?

jaeger19 said:

I do.. of course I do that. So do my competitors. its how prices are set John.

Click to expand...

No, you don't. You pay the going rate for labor and materials, and you charge the going rate for your services. If you think that the dollar is worthless, you don't offer up $20 for a pack of gum.

jaeger19 said:

Nope.. there is always some concern. It comes and goes based on a number of factors but concern for the debt and deficit always has some effect.

Click to expand...

The ignorance of politicians has no bearing on the ability of the government to create and spend money.

jaeger19 said:

Yeah.. you have to help me out there. Please explain as a businessman.. and a corporate owner.. why I want more unemployed people unable to buy my products and I want to have to pay exorbitant amounts for healthcare insurance for my employees. Please explain the advantage to me. I would love to hear your expertise.

Click to expand...

Unemployed people keep the price of labor low. That should be obvious. And as a corporate owner, the price you pay for healthcare is well worth the benefits to you, since you are just taking the costs out of their salaries anyway. Employer-provided healthcare makes workers extra dependent on keeping that job, especially when health problems make buying a plan a la carte too expensive. It also makes it harder for employees to move in search of other jobs.

jaeger19 said:

Actually what more proof do you need that you are wrong?. Clinton and the republicans reduced the deficit in 1998. Check. Obama had severe budget fights over money spent in the recession for the recovery. Check. Obama and the administration checked spending and reduced the deficit as the economy improved...check.
And why? Because of concern for past spending as well as current spending.

Click to expand...

Evidence of "concern" is not evidence that I am wrong about the government's ability to create and spend money. Do you see the difference? You are pointing to believers as evidence that God exists.

jaeger19 said:

Bingo..and your model doesn't match up with human behavior. I.e Economics.
IF your economic model explained human economic behavior... then we should have multiple instances where we spent so much that we got to hyperinflation, or there was "nothing on the shelves to buy".. as you like to say.

Click to expand...

Maybe you don't understand human behavior as well as you think you do. What you are putting forward as evidence is not evidence, it's just your opinion - as is your definition of economics.

jaeger19 said:

IF the only constraints to the money supply is hyperinflation, and "nothing on the shelves to buy"... is an explanation of human behavior.. then we should basically spend until we hit those constraints.. and only then pull back.

But your model DOES NOT.. explain human behavior.. since we have multiple instances in which money supply and government spending was constrained.. well well before that.

Your theory simply does not accurately describe nor predict human behavior. And thus its largely a useless model.

Click to expand...

See above. Your reasoning is flawed. Why would you think that hyperinflation is the only thing guiding people's behavior? That's ridiculous.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

Well, what I'm saying is true, and the government doesn't ever have to cut benefits to be "more solvent."

When this crisis hit, suddenly the govt. came up with, what, $2 trillion to push into the economy? With talk of trillions more in the near future? This should make it immediately clear that anytime the govt. claims that it "doesn't have the money" to pay for some program, it's total baloney. I have been saying this for years. Money is not a problem for the feds. Resources (i.e. ventilators) are the limiting factor.

Republicans cut benefits in the name of fiscal responsibility only because cutting benefits furthers their political goals. If trump pushes for M4A, you won't hear a peep about the cost from Republicans in Congress.

Click to expand...

Ten years after the Fed's experiment via QE people are still having a hard time accepting what you have been saying here. I know I have. For some time I thought your postings were all wrong. Guess what. We went through QE and low to zero interest rates for a decade. The U.S. dollar is still the strongest in the developed world.

Still have a hard time believing this would work when the economy is at full capacity. We have not seen that yet. What we have seen is the federal government and Federal Reserve fill in major "potholes" when the economy shrank dollars. In a global economy not sure where the bottlenecks in supply would come from that could cause inflation.

Moderate Right said:

When you print money on worthless paper you are eventually left with worthless paper that has ink on it. At some point monopoly money will be worth more than government printed money. Hopefully the government printed money can be used as a substitute for toilet paper, which has apparently turned into white gold. Under your system, money is not even needed. We can just declare ourselves a socialistic society and the government can just give everything away without the need to trade worthless paper in exchange for goods and services.

Click to expand...

American currency is made of cotton. Not paper.

Moderate Right said:

When you print money on worthless paper you are eventually left with worthless paper that has ink on it. At some point monopoly money will be worth more than government printed money. Hopefully the government printed money can be used as a substitute for toilet paper, which has apparently turned into white gold. Under your system, money is not even needed. We can just declare ourselves a socialistic society and the government can just give everything away without the need to trade worthless paper in exchange for goods and services.

Click to expand...

That is the problem Reagan had as president so he nailed the problem and solved it. I am told by Dayton that money is printed on cotton.

washunut said:

Ten years after the Fed's experiment via QE people are still having a hard time accepting what you have been saying here. I know I have. For some time I thought your postings were all wrong. Guess what. We went through QE and low to zero interest rates for a decade. The U.S. dollar is still the strongest in the developed world.

Still have a hard time believing this would work when the economy is at full capacity. We have not seen that yet. What we have seen is the federal government and Federal Reserve fill in major "potholes" when the economy shrank dollars. In a global economy not sure where the bottlenecks in supply would come from that could cause inflation.

Click to expand...

Inflation is defined as way too few goods available to purchase.

washunut said:

Ten years after the Fed's experiment via QE people are still having a hard time accepting what you have been saying here. I know I have. For some time I thought your postings were all wrong. Guess what. We went through QE and low to zero interest rates for a decade. The U.S. dollar is still the strongest in the developed world.

Still have a hard time believing this would work when the economy is at full capacity. We have not seen that yet. What we have seen is the federal government and Federal Reserve fill in major "potholes" when the economy shrank dollars. In a global economy not sure where the bottlenecks in supply would come from that could cause inflation.

Click to expand...

It's always refreshing to hear somebody actually admit that they have changed their mind because of what they have observed. I'm not sure why it's such a hard thing for people to do, but you are one of the few.

The economy has not been at full capacity since WWII. Since that time, there have always been unused resources and unused/underutilized labor. Today, it's done by design (NAIRU reasoning), in a misguided effort to keep inflation low by keeping wages low.

If things are done right, the bottleneck will be a shortage of labor. That way, any inflation will be due to inflated wages. Which would be a good thing, as it would reduce income inequality.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

No, you don't. You pay the going rate for labor and materials, and you charge the going rate for your services. If you think that the dollar is worthless, you don't offer up $20 for a pack of gum.

Click to expand...

and that "going rate".. is what we are able to charge and get away with it. If we can charge 20 dollars for a pack of gum..and people will pay it.. its what it will cost. Prices are not set by labor and materials. We have been over this by the way. Prices are set by what the market will bear. Its why when you go into a clothing store.. and mans pair of pants with more labor, and more material cost... is substantially less than a woman's pair of pants.. with less material and labor cost.

The ignorance of politicians has no bearing on the ability of the government to create and spend money.

Click to expand...

That's absurd... You are disproved every time the Congress has a fight over the government spending budget.

Unemployed people keep the price of labor low.

Click to expand...

And keep profits low. Working people.. that by my products pay me more than my labor costs.. hence I make profit. More unemployed people.. who don't buy products.. hurts me way more than any "benefit".. from lower wages.

And as a corporate owner, the price you pay for healthcare is well worth the benefits to you, since you are just taking the costs out of their salaries anyway

Click to expand...

Actually no. Because as an employer, I really can't do that because not all employees value the cost of healthcare as much as salary. Raising an employees salary 2 dollars and hour.. has way more perceived benefit and frankly more ability to hire than paying 2 more dollars an hour to an insurance company to maintain current benefits.

It also makes it harder for employees to move in search of other jobs.

Click to expand...

True to some extent... however, given the cost of healthcare insurance.. the recruitment tool is more expensive and has less value than simply competing on salary for most companies.

For large companies that can self insure? Then you might have a point.

Evidence of "concern" is not evidence that I am wrong about the government's ability to create and spend money. Do you see the difference?

Click to expand...

It is wrong because it shows that your premise doesn't have any predictive value in human behavior...ie. economics.

You are pointing to believers as evidence that God exists.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I am pointing out that those believers.. behave a certain way in the economy. and thus effect the economy in a variety of ways.

You ignore the fact that their beliefs cause them to behave in a certain and often predictable ways in the economy. Thus your economic model is invalid.

Maybe you don't understand human behavior as well as you think you do. What you are putting forward as evidence is not evidence, it's just your opinion - as is your definition of economics.

Click to expand...

Well.. I would submit that I accept that human behavior..ie.. the decisions they make, is what the study of economics is about. But you go ahead and prove to me that the study of economics doesn't have to do with human behavior..

See above. Your reasoning is flawed. Why would you think that hyperinflation is the only thing guiding people's behavior? That's ridiculous.

Click to expand...

See above.. your reasoning is flawed. YOU are the one stating that the ONLY thing that controls what a government can spend.. is hyperinflation.. or when "we don't have things on the shelves to buy".

If that were the case..that the only constraint.. was those things.. there should then be plenty of evidence of the US going to that point.

jaeger19 said:

That's absurd... You are disproved every time the Congress has a fight over the government spending budget.

Click to expand...

OK, then. Name one time that the government has been unable to do what they wanted to do because they lacked enough dollars.

jaeger19 said:

And keep profits low. Working people.. that by my products pay me more than my labor costs.. hence I make profit. More unemployed people.. who don't buy products.. hurts me way more than any "benefit".. from lower wages.

Click to expand...

You are not the economy as a whole. And if you don't believe that ownership has been buying politicians in order to keep wages low, then I have a bridge to sell you.

jaeger19 said:

See above.. your reasoning is flawed. YOU are the one stating that the ONLY thing that controls what a government can spend.. is hyperinflation.. or when "we don't have things on the shelves to buy".

If that were the case..that the only constraint.. was those things.. there should then be plenty of evidence of the US going to that point.

Click to expand...

I have NEVER stated that hyperinflation is the ONLY thing that controls what a government can spend. You are again falling back into your incredibly aggravating habit of making s4!t up and moving the goalposts.

INFLATION is the constraint. Not HYPERinflation, just regular ol' inflation.

Rexedgar said:

U.S. airline industry pleads for $58 billion in grants, loans

The airlines want 58 billion to relieve the bookings drop off. Everyone that gets sent home sick gets paid, 1.5 trillion was pumped into the economy last week. The Fed dropped the interest rate near zero. 8+ billion for coronavirus. When does the money run out?

Click to expand...

Guidelines should be placed on "Airlines'
1. Airlines MUST suspend "Giving Stock Options' to any executive!! ( if they want it "buy it at the same rate that is offered to all employees".
2. Cap Executive Compensation: the max that any CEO can earn is $1 Million and that is including Bonus and Benefits".
3. Institute a 'Employee Stock Plan, until 51% of the company is Employee Owned, (Equal Shares Owned by Employees Regardless of Title or Position), (not a system where Executive are issued more shares than employees'. Example: If there is wage concession, it will be contributed to paying interest on the Bond, it must be in an amount of XX% per employee, regardless of wage level. (allow the Airline to Take Out a Federal Backed Bond to take these shares off the open Market) THIS IS TO PREVENT ANY RAIDERS FROM OVERTAKING THE COMPANY.
4 BAN Mergers and Acquisition - (This is public transportation and should be considered as a national security transportation system).
5. Airlines can only buy Fuel through a Government Exchange, to help stabilize Fuel Cost. (this will stop gouging, and promote "Fair Competition" to ensure the market is not monopolized by any collections of corporate raiders and corporate consolidators.
6. Cut the Over-Crowding - and Space The Seats with Respect For Customers!!!! Use and Modify As Necessary Federal Standards for "Seat Size and Seat Spacing".... 'Force This Industry To Go Back To Being Public Service Transportation Provider... "Not packing people in like chickens are packed into a Chicken Farms".
7. MANDATE, Airline "Use ALL Air Packs during Flight... No more of this shutting down Air Packs... to increase profits.

They cannot get Federal Money, to do what they have done in the past!!!!!!!!!!!!! this will also STOP the executive driven over-leveraging of the company and risking the business and the lives of its employees and destroying competition in the industry's market place.

Employees will have Equal Representation on the Board of Directors, instead of the "Clone Cult' that previous has ran Boards, that caused these companies to make bad decisions, which impact travelers, employees and the general economy.

It's a New Day, that REQUIRES "A NEW PARADIGM" !!!!!!

Strengthen the Union's so there is and remains Fair Representation and Fair Voice to Employee Groups.

America CAN'T Go Back To Doing What It Did Before.

Click to expand...

Its time Business that claim themselves as a Publicly Traded Company, Learn to Respect The Public, which means, Employees and Customers, Cities They Operate and the Nation which they exist (United State of America).

Profit will be directed as to investments, by the Boards Approval, and this Board will be comprised of Equal Voice of Employees. (the employees are front line, they know more about the day to day reality of business operations than these '4 yr over paid university degree riders', who should not be allowed to make major industry and business impacting decisions.

This is the Point in Time within this Era of the 21st Century, where RESPECT IS GIVEN TO THE EMPLOYEES and the Sustainability of Industry!!!!!!!

America has to abandon the business and industry models based on the old system which was founded during slavery, segregation and share cropping. It has damaged poor whites, women and minorities "too long".... Its time to "CHANGE"... if America is to Move Forward and Progress for All Americans and The American Nation of The United States of America.

Minimum Wage CAN NO LONGER be based on what it cost to house and feed a slave!!! it must be based on what is the standard of living cost in America.


It's Time To Realize...... "PEOPLE ARE WHAT MAKES A NATION'S ECONOMY".... Its Time To Respect People, and through doing so, America will Prosper greater than it ever has in the history of the world.

Click to expand...

America won't run out of Money, it simply has to ensure that "money circulates through the hands of its citizens as equal person as individuals. We have much work to do, in Rebuilding our Infrastructure and Rebuilding our Broken Down Rural Areas and our Broken Down Inner Cities.

No more of the centuries old game of destroying areas because it become populated with poor whites and minorities.... to keep them in poverty and driven them by the games of divisiveness, while 1% reap profits in astronomical figures, by the games that were rigged against poor whites and minorities.

Don't worry, the Tea Party will save us from this white president.

Rexedgar said:

U.S. airline industry pleads for $58 billion in grants, loans

The airlines want 58 billion to relieve the bookings drop off. Everyone that gets sent home sick gets paid, 1.5 trillion was pumped into the economy last week. The Fed dropped the interest rate near zero. 8+ billion for coronavirus. When does the money run out?

Click to expand...

How Rich is rich enough?

It is the Richest who are getting richer faster at the expense of the People.

Right Wing Tax Cut economics
U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

Ever play Monopoly with your kids and one kid is about to go broke and starts crying? I just gave them more money to keep the game going. When I ran out of money in the bank, I used chips. The point was to keep the game going, the supply of money was endless. Now once all the properties had been purchased, hotels on every one, rents paid in full over and over again, the game would end in a draw. But at no time did we ever run out of money, never.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

Venezuela had far different problems that we have. Our situations are not comparable.

We have had our credit rating lowered in the past, because of Congress' inability to play nice together and the occasional threat of Republicans refusing to increase the debt limit, not because of our operational inability to meet all of our financial obligations.

Did it increase interest rates? Nope.

Did it devalue the dollar? Nope.

Did it, in any way, affect the government's ability to create and spend their own money? Nope.

Click to expand...

In 1995, my new Ford F-150 cost me $12,000.
Today, a new F-150 is around $35-40k.

No inflation?

What will a loaf of bread be in a year?

I’m stocking up on flour (among other food stuff) as an investment. Flour in the freezer will last years, as well as vacuum packed beef.

Panic buying alone will cause inflation.

Aberro said:

In 1995, my new Ford F-150 cost me $12,000.
Today, a new F-150 is around $35-40k.

Click to expand...

And I'll bet that a 2020 F-150 is a whole lot better than a 1995 F-150.

Aberro said:

No inflation?

Click to expand...

From 1995 to 2020, the average inflation rate was 2.22%/year. Look out, Venezuele!

Aberro said:

What will a loaf of bread be in a year?

Click to expand...

Probably about 2.22% more than it costs this year.

Aberro said:

I’m stocking up on flour (among other food stuff) as an investment. Flour in the freezer will last years, as well as vacuum packed beef.

Panic buying alone will cause inflation.

Click to expand...

So you think it's a good idea to 1. buy a chest freezer, 2. buy foodstuffs during a run on food, 3. pay for the electricity to run that freezer for years, all so you can 4. save a few pennies by eating old flour and freezer-burnt meat? Even if the price of food doubled, that would still be a bad move.

Panic buying in places where the supply chains are strong and diversified - like America - always makes the panic buyers look stupid in the end. I just came back from the grocery store, and I was able to get everything I went there for, and the prices were the same as they always were. And yes, they had plenty of toilet paper.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

And I'll bet that a 2020 F-150 is a whole lot better than a 1995 F-150.



From 1995 to 2020, the average inflation rate was 2.22%/year. Look out, Venezuele!



Probably about 2.22% more than it costs this year.



So you think it's a good idea to 1. buy a chest freezer, 2. buy foodstuffs during a run on food, 3. pay for the electricity to run that freezer for years, all so you can 4. save a few pennies by eating old flour and freezer-burnt meat? Even if the price of food doubled, that would still be a bad move.

Panic buying in places where the supply chains are strong and diversified - like America - always makes the panic buyers look stupid in the end. I just came back from the grocery store, and I was able to get everything I went there for, and the prices were the same as they always were. And yes, they had plenty of toilet paper.

Click to expand...

I’ve been prepping for years, not just now. I have not gone to the grocery store in a month.
I have plenty of everything.

I now have a 2013 F150, it sucks compared to my old 1995, I kick myself for trading for a longer bed.

Aberro said:

In 1995, my new Ford F-150 cost me $12,000.
Today, a new F-150 is around $35-40k.

No inflation?

What will a loaf of bread be in a year?

I’m stocking up on flour (among other food stuff) as an investment. Flour in the freezer will last years, as well as vacuum packed beef.

Panic buying alone will cause inflation.

Click to expand...

How about your TV? In 89 I bought the most expensive Mitsubishi TV at the store, it was less then 40 inches. Cost me a grand. Just bought a 50 inch one for less then 300 bucks that blows the socks off that 89 version.

Vadinho said:

How about your TV? In 89 I bought the most expensive Mitsubishi TV at the store, it was less then 40 inches. Cost me a grand. Just bought a 50 inch one for less then 300 bucks that blows the socks off that 89 version.

Click to expand...

I don’t watch TV accept for local news/weather on an antenna, I can tell you nothing about it accept we have had it 15 or so years.

I won’t buy another, really don’t need it. I don’t care what they cost. All info I need is available on the internet. If that goes down, I have am/fm radio, if that goes down, I have SW and HAM radio.

The price of your TV has nothing to do with hyperinflation in the USA, they are not made here.

Food is the issue.

Vadinho said:

Ever play Monopoly with your kids and one kid is about to go broke and starts crying? I just gave them more money to keep the game going. When I ran out of money in the bank, I used chips. The point was to keep the game going, the supply of money was endless. Now once all the properties had been purchased, hotels on every one, rents paid in full over and over again, the game would end in a draw. But at no time did we ever run out of money, never.

Click to expand...

Especially with your own fiat money. Have you considered creating your own notes in higher denominations for fun, practice, and art?

What if, unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed in our at-will employment States was at the equivalent to fourteen dollars an hour with or without a statutory fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage to actually provide labor input to the economy?

Once even the Poor can pay their fair capital share of the Tax burden, we should be able to afford more of the Government we are finding exigent to meet modern contingencies.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

OK, then. Name one time that the government has been unable to do what they wanted to do because they lacked enough dollars.

Click to expand...

During the OBama presidency.

You are not the economy as a whole. And if you don't believe that ownership has been buying politicians in order to keep wages low, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Click to expand...

Translation.. you are unable to explain the logic of your position that business WANT high unemployment to "keep wages low".

Now.. as to ownership buying politicians to keep wages low? Certainly.. but NOT by trying to increase unemployment rates as you contend!.. That's pure stupidity to think that I benefit more from having fewer customers able to pay for my goods.

We lobby to keep wages low through things like Medicaid, (because if you work in a business where you pay at or close to minimum wage... your employees don't WANT higher wages that kick them and their families off Medicaid and businesses structure they wages around benefits like Medicaid). Through lobbying for "right to work laws".. that decrease the likelihood of unionization, through lobbying for immigration laws that create a second class worker that works hard for lower wages and doesn't dare complain when their employer violates wage, safety and other work laws.

But you wouldn't understand all that would you john?... because your religion (MMT) doesn't explain such things.

I have NEVER stated that hyperinflation is the ONLY thing that controls what a government can spend. You are again falling back into your incredibly aggravating habit of making s4!t up and moving the goalposts.

INFLATION is the constraint. Not HYPERinflation, just regular ol' inflation.

Click to expand...

BWAAHHH... look at you waffling. Oh right.. the other constraint is "when we don't have enough things on the shelves to buy".

Gee John.. if regular ol inflation is the constraint... then we should never be spending into a deficit and debt. Since we have had inflation for decades.. and ran deficits.

So.. your model doesn't explain jack.

jaeger19 said:

During the OBama presidency.

Click to expand...

Nope. Not even close. Political battles over spending are not evidence that the U.S. government is ever lacking for dollars.

Face it, you lost this one. Learn, and move on.

jaeger19 said:

Translation.. you are unable to explain the logic of your position that business WANT high unemployment to "keep wages low".

Click to expand...

I already explained my logic, much of which you ended up agreeing with.

jaeger19 said:

Now.. as to ownership buying politicians to keep wages low? Certainly.. but NOT by trying to increase unemployment rates as you contend!.. That's pure stupidity to think that I benefit more from having fewer customers able to pay for my goods.

Click to expand...

Again, you are not the whole economy. If your sales are to the very low end, then you want as many people to be employed as possible. If you are selling used cars, for instance. But if you are a big business, and labor is a substantial cost, then the benefits of cheap labor outweigh the possibility of a few extra customers. And if this wasn't true, then outsourcing wouldn't be a thing.

jaeger19 said:

We lobby to keep wages low through things like Medicaid, (because if you work in a business where you pay at or close to minimum wage... your employees don't WANT higher wages that kick them and their families off Medicaid and businesses structure they wages around benefits like Medicaid). Through lobbying for "right to work laws".. that decrease the likelihood of unionization, through lobbying for immigration laws that create a second class worker that works hard for lower wages and doesn't dare complain when their employer violates wage, safety and other work laws.

Click to expand...

By your reasoning, those businesses should want to pay their employees more, so they could buy more - but that is certainly not the case. Again, the cost of labor outweighs the possibility of a few extra customers.

jaeger19 said:

But you wouldn't understand all that would you john?... because your religion (MMT) doesn't explain such things.

Click to expand...

I don't need MMT insights to win this debate with you. Your reasoning doesn't come from a place of logic, it comes from a place of "I'll argue with anything John says."

jaeger19 said:

... look at you waffling. Oh right.. the other constraint is "when we don't have enough things on the shelves to buy".

Gee John.. if regular ol inflation is the constraint... then we should never be spending into a deficit and debt. Since we have had inflation for decades.. and ran deficits.

So.. your model doesn't explain jack.

Click to expand...

Write this down, so I don't have to continue to repeat myself:

Inflation is caused by any number of things, as is a bit of deflation. Demand is an inflationary pressure, but we probably haven't experienced true demand-pull inflation in the U.S. since WWII.

HYPERinflation is caused by a lack of production; nothing on the shelves to buy, especially food.

JohnfrmClevelan said:

Nope. Not even close. Political battles over spending are not evidence that the U.S. government is ever lacking for dollars.

Face it, you lost this one. Learn, and move on.

Click to expand...

Naw face it John.. you lost this one. Learn.

Of course political battles over spending is evidence. One its evidence of economic behavior. When people are concerned about the debt and deficit... they act to manage the money supply. Political budget fights over the cost of things, are evidence of this. Its what limits our spending.

Now..if YOUR model was correct... that governments with fiat currency can spend away without much concern? Well.. then. the US should NOT have had budget fights over anything.. as according to your model.. there is plenty of money for everything democrats or republicans want. But.. your model does not explain reality now does it. If it did.. then there would be no budget fights over cost..

I already explained my logic, much of which you ended up agreeing with.

Click to expand...

No.. you made the absurd claim that companies not only want high unemployment but that they lobby strongly for such conditions. And you had no logical explanation for your claim.. other than.. "well companies try to reduce labor costs"...

Why yes they do.. but that doesn't mean they want a condition that means they have very few customers. Which is what happens with high unemployment.

Again, you are not the whole economy. If your sales are to the very low end, then you want as many people to be employed as possible. If you are selling used cars, for instance. But if you are a big business, and labor is a substantial cost, then the benefits of cheap labor outweigh the possibility of a few extra customers. And if this wasn't true, then outsourcing wouldn't be a thing.

Click to expand...

Actually yes.. my business is the economy when it comes to how the economy works. If your sales are domestic sales.. as most US companies are.. then you want as many people employed as possible. Because this increases demand for your products. The benefits of cheap labor do not outweigh the benefits of extra customers. You make profit off those customers which means that the cost of labor is less than what you sell if for. More customers.. means more money.

And if this wasn't true, then outsourcing wouldn't be a thing.

Click to expand...

No.. outsourcing is a way that US companies can take advantage of lower labor costs.. while MAINTAINING..their customers base.. since despite the US outsourcing.. unemployment has remained low.. in fact historically low.

If what you say were true.. then there should have been no need for economic stimulus for any of our recessions, nor depression.. including the current one.. because businesses should be doing great with the high unemployment and all that cheap labor. According to your premise.. the companies.. especially the big companies should be lobbying congress to NOT do anything to stimulate the current economy because according to you.. high unemployment is so beneficial.

By your reasoning, those businesses should want to pay their employees more, so they could buy more

Click to expand...

In some cases yes. Some companies do and have set wages so that their workers could purchase the goods that they produce. Most of the time.. businesses pay more simply to attract workers.. and this leads to workers having more money, and thus the ability to buy more production.

I doubt you can find many businesses that would want the US labor market to drop to say 1-2 dollars an hour like the Chinese or Mexico. Do you think they would want that when the us has such a large trade deficit?

I don't need MMT insights to win this debate with you. Your reasoning doesn't come from a place of logic, it comes from a place of "I'll argue with anything John says."

Click to expand...

Of course my reasoning comes from a place of logic. Heck man..you just claimed that the vast majority of us companies.. want high unemployment...

While meanwhile we have high unemployment and they are clamoring for bailouts.

nflation is caused by any number of things, as is a bit of deflation. Demand is an inflationary pressure, but we probably haven't experienced true demand-pull inflation in the U.S. since WWII.

HYPERinflation is caused by a lack of production; nothing on the shelves to buy, especially food.

Click to expand...

Pooh.. stop deflecting. YOU are the one that said that the only constraint was inflation and hyperinflation. Well.. we have had inflation..and we still run deficits.

The point is John..is that your MMT model.. doesn't explain economic behavior..and thus is useless. No amount of your deflections can get around that.