Household Economics or professional approval?

Many will know that James Meadway, formerly of the New Economics Foundation, was the economic advisor to John McDonnell, previously shadow chancellor.

During his time as advisor there was distinct adversity for people who believed that the government in fact created money. Yet the denial came down broadly to the idea that James Meadway couldn’t live with the fact that the economics profession couldn’t believe it – and so it could not be done. He wanted fellow professional approval.

To be fair, with the rent to pay, many of us do, too.

It is much more difficult to plow your furrow against the grain unless you are very sure of your ground.

Being groundsure is what progressives have to engender. We need to be so sure of our ground that there is nobody able logically or legitimately able to argue against the fact that government creates money when it spends and destroys it when it taxes.

It may be basic tally sticks but most have forgotten this – and indeed I doubt most journalists know what they are…

Nonetheless, James Meadway has written an interesting article for the Guardian, which shows radical tendencies! suggesting that nationalisation doesn’t work very well and pointing out that in general, financial systems also don’t work for society….

Yet still, about his profession, he seems rather conservative. It is certainly true that Labour shouldn’t strive to upset the City, but they should surely tell them that they do have some understanding of the fiat, sovereign money system – effectively ‘OUR’ (not the taxpayers’) money!

While the Guardian article may frustrate, this Times extract (paywalled – so this is a screencap) is really for the birds:

Which extract was quoted approvingly by an ex Vince Cable and Theresa May advisor, Giles Wilkes. The article is by Clair Foges in the Times.

I don’t expect much of the Times but in my naivete I expected more of poltical advisors.

How can there ever be ‘payback time’ when you create the payback currency? Indeed when you are actually in charge of the Magic Money Tree? I just have to hope that I’m the banker when Clare Foges plays Monopoly…

Certainly James Meadway is by contrast, quite far-seeing.

For the rest we really are in the very hazy shade.

The media still has unthinking household economics at its core.

There is much more to do…

Comments

  1. Bill Hughes -

    The government think that the “Ways Means” money used to finance the pandemic are temporary and that the business as usual system will kick in as soon as (if) the emergency subsides. They must do this so they can resume the absurd austerity policy and keep the population subdued and in thrall to whatever crumbs are thrown from the rich man’s table.

    1. Peter May -

      That is very much the danger…

  2. Michael G -

    The money disappears into thin air
    The government replaces it.
    It hasn’t created extra money, it has just replaced money that vanished.
    So if you take away the replacement money again, what are you left with?

    1. Peter May -

      By then much less than you started with!
      Why people that think they understand economics should want this is unfathomable. They’re not supposed to be stupid – so you are left with some sort of power grab.
      But I really think that all the people mentioned above (except Meadway) actually believe what they say so the deluded seem to be being used by their controllers? The question is who are they…

      1. Michael G -

        Worse, the money disappeared via ordinary people through no fault of their own. Conventional economics says – “You lost it, you pay for it” – “But it wasn’t our fault” – “That doesn’t matter”

  3. Peter May -

    Agreed

    1. Peter May -

      Thank you for the link

Write a reply or comment Comments Policy

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name *