The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
the key to blocking austerity is to understand how it is rooted in privilege, and to articulate a future vision that can animate a movement to destroy privilege, resist the elite, and defeat disaster capitalism.
I like this. It's important to frame the debate in terms of revenues of capital vs. salary. The years of great economic growth, say 1950-1980, were characterised by a very different distribution of incomes, and the past thirty years have seen the capture of the economic system by capital, grabbing an ever increasing proportion of ever decreasing economic growth.
So that's one way of looking at the current crisis, an important one : capital is determined to maintain its share of income and wealth by putting the squeeze on the rest of us. Our great leaders toe the line because they don't question the curious doctrine that what is good for capital is good for everyone.
But the missing element in your analysis, Montereyan, is the limits to growth argument, the good old Malthusian, Club of Rome, ecologist explanation that we're going to run into a wall, or off a cliff.
Well, guess what, we have. We are now pedaling thin air like the coyote in the cartoon.
This does not invalidate your arguments -- it's not an "either/or" proposition. But it perhaps explains the sudden change of tune of the wise heads who govern us.
They have been accustomed to flattening out speed bumps in the growth curve, by deficit financing, and encouraged by low interest rates to believe that there is no need to pay back the deficits. This is perhaps the implicit contract between governments and capital : we keep inflation low, you lend us money cheaply.
The breakdown of this system comes when it becomes credible to question the sustainability of the model. It's convenient to blame speculators, but that's like blaming the flies who are attracted to a dung heap. The problem is that there is a genuine problem with the sustainability of borrowing to maintain government spending...
... because there is no convincing evidence that there will be sustained economic growth subsequently, to narrow the gap between revenue and spending.
And why is this?
Because we ran out of cheap energy. That was the principal driver of economic growth, and we are in an economic system that cannot be stable without growth. We are in overshoot, and we need to adjust to a lower level of energy inputs, which means less prosperity.
The question is, how we get there from here.
Austerity, as currently being implemented, will surely be harmful to the interests of capital, because severe recession is the result. It is surely in the best interests of owners of capital to share the effort now in order to limit the depth of the depression. The problem is, capital does not have a mind of its own. The market doesn't think. International regulation of capital will be too little, too late. National regulation will lead to protectionism which will probably make most things worse...
American exceptionalism : Apparently, the US can run deficits that are forbidden to other nations, who, as we see daily, are severely punished by the market. Geithner knows he has to continue to defend deficit spending. Does he know where that takes the US?
Just rambling. Carry on. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
Does he know where that takes the US?
where his chinese overlords want? off a cliff? 'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
Resource austerity would mean to take into account the limits to growth arguments and pay the true cost of resource luxuries. Resource austerity also means more more room for jobs. It also means money inflation.
Money austerity comes from believing money is a real thing that is neither created nor destroyed, only conserved, instead of a consensual token. It is ridiculous that there are both human and physical resources (I'm referring to plant, not raw materials) going idle because of lack of fiat tokens. But that is the situation, and attemting to economize on tokens is only going to result in greater capacity underutilisation. The hoarders of tokens will keep their hoard and may even succeed in safeguarding the exchange value of their hoard, but not only will resource overuse not be checked, but there will be an economic slump. But at least there won't be inflation. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
There are two kinds of austerity: money austerity and resource austerity.
Correct.
There may well be shortages - and hence a need for austerity - of 'money's worth'.
For instance land/location - which is the basis of more than two thirds of money in existence - is limited, and so are non-renewable resources of all kinds. In most countries land distribution is pretty 'austere' already, since a tiny proportion of the population owns most of it.
But in fact there can no more be a shortage of money than there can be a shortage of kilogrammes or metres.
It is only because we choose to use bank IOUs/credit objects/fiat tokens as 'money' - I prefer to call these monetary objects 'currency' - which means that there is a shortage of 'money'. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
But the insidious reality is that such a shortage of money can lead to people not being able to work exclusively on the basis of lack of money. It's as if you couldn't buy groceries at the market because the merchant has run out of kilogrammes. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
How they expect to receive their stream of compounded interest payments from the unemployed is beyond me, but that seems to be their concern. She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre
As I argued here, austerity finds some public support due to its ability to preserve privilege. In California, that plays out as white suburbanites who cannot imagine a lifestyle without dependence on the automobile and who see mass transit as being for the poor, people of color, and the young are fighting to block mass transit projects because it presents such a threat to their perceived worldviews and privileges. It's an absurd situation, but it's very real.
What we may well be seeing is the belief that the elite do not have to suffer any energy austerity, so that can be forced onto everyone else, and segments of the American white middle class are convinced they can cleave off from the rest of us and enjoy the benefits the elite are enjoying. They're convinced that's what happened in the early 1980s, so why not try it again?
Again, I am curious how this plays out in Europe, and what drives the public reaction to/acceptance of austerity, and whether it has any relation to the forces here in the US. And the world will live as one
If there are the resources to make what is being bought with the currency, a sovereign government can simply issue the currency to buy it.
When the Eurozone countries surrendered their sovereignty to a common central bank built on neo-Hooverian lines, they set themselves up for this, which sooner or later has to be solved by reconstituting the ECB as a functional central bank. But neither the US, Japan, nor any of the other nations that have retained their sovereignty are under the same constraint. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
Over Germany's dead body. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
Sure, it's blatantly against the treaties, but the thing about fines is that if you have a dependent central bank, you can print money to pay them with.
- Jake Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
A transitional alternative is for national Treasuries to create x billion euro's worth of tax anticipation credits, and to issue them directly to public or private entities wishing to create productive assets.
Service-providers-formerly-known-as-banks manage the process and an accountable monetary authority oversees it.
A service charge covers service/platform costs, and there is a guarantee charge paid into a default pool for the use of a Treasury guarantee, from which the service provider gets a performance-based share.
No ECB Euro's are created: the Euro is used as an abstract unit of measure or value standard.
The only question then is what should be the basis of the tax being anticipated. I favour a levy on land rental values, and another on carbon use. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
...
The only question then is what should be the basis of the tax being anticipated. I favour a levy on land rental values, and another on carbon use.
And the politicians with the insight and political capital to carry this out exist in which fictional universe? By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
And the politicians with the insight and political capital to carry this out exist in which fictional universe?
:-)
A parallel one to the surreal one in which we live.....
There's no way it would happen, of course, because turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
But when people say there is no alternative it's always fun to point out that there are several...... "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
So it's not a debt instrument, and it's not collateralised either. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
Central banks in what capacity?
As lenders of last resort? That is still needed, in fact this should be now subsumed into a market-maker of last resort function.
As credit regulator/supervisor authorities?
As central clearinghouses for payment and settlement? By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
Migeru:
As lenders of last resort? That is still needed,
In Hong Kong it is not the Central Bank which fulfils that function because there isn't one.
A Monetary Authority - as in HK - would set the parameters/standards for credit creation.
As central clearinghouses for payment and settlement?
There is no need for a central counterparty aka single point of failure.
A mutual guarantee with a default pool managed by a service provider would do fine. eg P & I clubs in the insurance industry.
Settlements/netting of open bilateral credits requires only suitable software and algorithms. brent forward contracts settle this way on expiry by generating 'chains' and book-outs. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
How does the fact that HK chooses to peg to the dollar or use the UK legal system change that? "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
Hong Kong Calms Depositors After Bank East Asia Run (Update2) - Bloomberg.com
Hong Kong hasn't had a bank failure since the Hong Kong Monetary Authority was founded in 1993, though it has a long history of financial crises associated with its lenders. There was a brief run on Standard Chartered Plc and Citigroup Inc.'s local unit after the failure of BCCI Group in 1991, while the failure of a small Hong Kong bank in the 1980s triggered runs on rivals and led to efforts to strengthen regulation. A banking crisis in 1965 prompted a government-backed takeover of Hang Seng Bank Ltd. by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp. for HK$51 million ($6.6 million). HSBC Holdings Plc now owns 62 percent of Hang Seng, which has a market value of $36.5 billion.
Hong Kong hasn't had a bank failure since the Hong Kong Monetary Authority was founded in 1993, though it has a long history of financial crises associated with its lenders. There was a brief run on Standard Chartered Plc and Citigroup Inc.'s local unit after the failure of BCCI Group in 1991, while the failure of a small Hong Kong bank in the 1980s triggered runs on rivals and led to efforts to strengthen regulation.
A banking crisis in 1965 prompted a government-backed takeover of Hang Seng Bank Ltd. by the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp. for HK$51 million ($6.6 million). HSBC Holdings Plc now owns 62 percent of Hang Seng, which has a market value of $36.5 billion.
The Linked Exchange Rate System was established in 1983. It is in essence a Currency Board system, which requires both the stock and the flow of the Monetary Base to be fully backed by foreign reserves. Any change in the size of the Monetary Base has to be fully matched by a corresponding change in the foreign reserves. In Hong Kong, the Monetary Base comprises the following components: Certificates of Indebtedness (as backing for banknotes) and government-issued notes and coins; the sum of balances of banks' clearing accounts (Aggregate Balance) maintained with the HKMA for the purpose of clearing and settling transactions between the banks themselves, and also between the banks and the HKMA; and the outstanding amount of Exchange Fund Bills and Notes.
Certificates of Indebtedness (as backing for banknotes) and government-issued notes and coins;
the sum of balances of banks' clearing accounts (Aggregate Balance) maintained with the HKMA for the purpose of clearing and settling transactions between the banks themselves, and also between the banks and the HKMA; and
the outstanding amount of Exchange Fund Bills and Notes.
It also functions as a clearinghouse for interbank payment and settlement.
The role of the Fed is totally incidental here. They might as well have mandated that the HKMA must have enough gold reserves (or barrels of oil) to back all the banks' liabilities. By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
They don't have a Central Bank and never have had.
My point, as you well know, is that neither Central Banks nor private banks are necessary intermediaries. Conventional, yes: necessary or even desirable, demonstrably not.
Banking as service provision is a different question.
The financial system cannot be fixed without systemic fiscal reform of a kind which is politically impossible.
Introduction of a complementary financial system is the only solution, and IMHO this will be in place within two to five years. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
banks' clearing accounts (Aggregate Balance) maintained with the HKMA for the purpose of clearing and settling transactions between the banks themselves, and also between the banks and the HKMA
Can we please step away from the nominalist debate for a bit and just look at the functions of the institutions? By laying out pros and cons we risk inducing people to join the debate, and losing control of a process that only we fully understand. - Alan Greenspan
Central Moneymarkets Unit The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) established the Central Moneymarkets Unit (CMU) in 1990 to provide computerised clearing and settlement facilities for Exchange Fund Bills and Notes. In December 1993, the HKMA extended the service to other Hong Kong dollar debt securities. It offers an efficient, safe and convenient clearing and custodian system for Hong Kong dollar debt instruments. Since December 1994, the CMU has been linked with other regional and international systems. This helps to promote Hong Kong dollar debt securities to overseas investors who can make use of these links to participate in the Hong Kong dollar debt market. The CMU service was further extended to non-Hong Kong dollar debt securities in January 1996. In December 1996, a seamless interface between the CMU and the Hong Kong dollar Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) interbank payment system was established. This enables the CMU system to provide real-time and end-of-day Delivery versus Payment (DvP) services to its members. The CMU was further linked to the US dollar, euro and Renminbi RTGS systems in December 2000, April 2003 and March 2006 respectively to provide real time DvP capability for debt securities denominated in those currencies and also intraday and overnight repo facilities for the US dollar and euro payment systems in Hong Kong.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) established the Central Moneymarkets Unit (CMU) in 1990 to provide computerised clearing and settlement facilities for Exchange Fund Bills and Notes. In December 1993, the HKMA extended the service to other Hong Kong dollar debt securities. It offers an efficient, safe and convenient clearing and custodian system for Hong Kong dollar debt instruments. Since December 1994, the CMU has been linked with other regional and international systems. This helps to promote Hong Kong dollar debt securities to overseas investors who can make use of these links to participate in the Hong Kong dollar debt market.
The CMU service was further extended to non-Hong Kong dollar debt securities in January 1996. In December 1996, a seamless interface between the CMU and the Hong Kong dollar Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) interbank payment system was established. This enables the CMU system to provide real-time and end-of-day Delivery versus Payment (DvP) services to its members.
The CMU was further linked to the US dollar, euro and Renminbi RTGS systems in December 2000, April 2003 and March 2006 respectively to provide real time DvP capability for debt securities denominated in those currencies and also intraday and overnight repo facilities for the US dollar and euro payment systems in Hong Kong.
The key point is that according to the definitive Hong Kong Payment Systems document there is no central counterparty whether named a Central Bank or not.
The Central Moneymarkets Unit (CMU) is a membership entity; acts as a custodian; provides no guarantee; and takes no credit risk. (see pages 122 onwards).
As you know, a custodian is a key element of the P2P finance architecture I advocate. "The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson
Why does there have to be a certain tax? Can you not just issue notes saying "this can be used instead of paying x euro in tax to country y"? Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
It did not help that the Irish Minister of Finance announced Ireland has 74.2bn euros of guaranteed bank loans, bonds, and systemic support falling due between now and Oct 1. This is around 55% of GNP. It sounds like everyone backed by the Irish government had the "clever" idea to roll over their debts to just before the guarantees expire.
This is financial tragi-comedy at its finest! A government dedicated to insuring that its feckless financial elites do not suffer for their folly, and who is praised by the WSJ for so doing, is brought low by the markets. A classic "What have you done for me lately!" "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by Oui - Dec 5 9 comments
by gmoke - Nov 28
by Oui - Dec 810 comments
by Oui - Dec 620 comments
by Oui - Dec 612 comments
by Oui - Dec 59 comments
by Oui - Dec 44 comments
by Oui - Dec 21 comment
by Oui - Dec 162 comments
by Oui - Dec 16 comments
by gmoke - Nov 303 comments
by Oui - Nov 3012 comments
by Oui - Nov 2838 comments
by Oui - Nov 2713 comments
by Oui - Nov 2511 comments
by Oui - Nov 24
by Oui - Nov 221 comment
by Oui - Nov 22
by Oui - Nov 2119 comments
by Oui - Nov 1615 comments
by Oui - Nov 154 comments