Summary by ChatGPT3.5:
- The speaker discusses Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and its application to government spending on infrastructure projects, emphasizing the idea that as long as there is work and people to do it, the government can create money for funding.
- Common criticisms of MMT, such as concerns about inflation and the need to collect money before spending, are questioned by the speaker.
- The speaker suggests that a guaranteed jobs program, involving government-supported infrastructure work, is a key aspect of MMT, without implying direct government employment.
- The example of USA’s regulatory capture in the railway industry is discussed, highlighting challenges in effective regulation due to industry influence on government decisions.
- The speaker underscores the importance of consumer willingness to pay for externalities, using examples like bottle return policies and gas taxes, and suggests that politicians may be hesitant to propose such measures due to potential public and retailer resistance.
below is direct from the .s.o.c. file; this was the inpuit to ChatGPT3.5 for the summary above.
i think the idea of mmt is as long as there is work to do and people to work, the govt can create as muhc money as needed to fund those work; take railway crossingss. potus declares every train crossing in the usa will be either overpass or underpass, priootizied by size/traffic/etc. directs the bnank to create the 1T$ coin; this moiney funds the huge effort, which the recrs of that money spend it into the economy (gorwing it) AND the govt taxes it ata rate that prevents infglation? – after done, the economy has grown infrastructure has improved, safety has increased, traffic flows better, etc.
so where’s the flaw? why is the commn response “govt cant create money due to inflatinnairy”
or therother one: “govt must save collect $1T before it can spend”
i think this is what is meant by the “garuneteed jobs program” a necessary part of the mmt; but it doesn’t mean govt is the hirer emplyoer, just provides the work on infrastructure that govt is expelkct to supply as a return for our taxes.
why usa? was thiniking about this is relation to the story by john olver on the reguilatory capture the trains in the usa have (needs updating when video of that episode is out)(META: and here is where I want to add a reminder in-line as I’m typing, like {@remindmebot in one week}, rleating t the strategy of maximing rail traffic at epexpncse of people (trains too long for sinding along route so they block intersections for long time; and other shehanigans, where a proper govt would be able to regulate this stuff, the usa cant seem to, since theyre bought and paid for by rail and therefore big business
but once agian this comes down to consumer wiloinghness to pay for these externaalities, since we ultimaqtly will. this assumes the cost to do railroad shittping for expamle as chealpy as posswible, oir making it saqfe and non-interferring as poossublr will increase (good assumption since the reason these things are allowed is imakes companies more money), the companies are not just going to absorb these costs… THEY WILL ALWAYS pass the cost on to the consumer.
and I maintina that n politician in their right mind will ever suggest this. same with pplatic vs. glass bottles. not only will the public revo0lt, wso will retailerrs, over bottle return. same with adding 10cents to the gas tax to fund better roads.
TO-DO: links to these other topics on the blog; summarize by ChatGPT; ask for remindmebot feature request; find other writing in s.o.c. file; BUT WHY????
