This is one of those areas where liberals help the super-capitalists in the distortion. The supposed prosperity of the Obama years was merely more people forced into crappy gig-type jobs, barely subsistence, and often not even that. But liberals wanted the Obama fantasy to seem real, so they spread the phony BS. Meanwhile, on the street, any real working person or anyone who knew real working people knew it was BS. Liberals fall in love with image, then they become cheerleaders for a PR fantasy. In the final analysis, they are no less delusional than conservatives.
There was a study released about 2 weeks ago that disproved the myth that “gig” work is overtaking normal work. You should google it.
The super-capitalists want us to believe that they know what they’re talking about. – Paul Buchheit
And so do economists.
Buchheit somehow manages to dance around the reality that CAPITALISM, not just “super-capitalism”, is a political economy that can never deliver peace, prosperity, justice, equality and/or a sustainable biosphere. It is antithetical to every basic attribute that contributes to decent lives for human beings.
As long as economists like Buchheit are taken seriously by “progressives”, liberals and a critical mass of humanity, we will continue to fail as a species and dance our way to Doomsday.
It’s time to start thinking of the UBI, or so called “universal basic income”. Also, more importantly we have to think about things such as a “maximum income” or to sell it more to the working/poor class, a top income tax rate say 90% on income over 5 million dollars. Let me be clear, I am not saying that the 5 mil should be the bottom or top end, but it’s time to think about it again (as was the case during the 1940’s). Also other taxes such as the “Tobin tax” on wall st and any number of taxes to tax the people that have been benefiting from our economy for the past 50 yrs (at least).
“Jobs for Everyone” is a slogan used by those who are too naive, blind, ignorant and/or gullible enough to not realize that not all people are employable. It is a fantasy.
I agree, but think we should be careful. Some on the right wing are now talking about this as a replacement for existing programs. So, instead of Social Security, food stamps, affordable housing assistance, Medicare, Medicaid, etc., you would get a sum of money and you are on your own. If it gets you the food, housing or healthcare you need, great, if not, go and beg. However, UBI was instituted with existing (or better yet, expanded) programs, different ballgame. I actually think that instead of injecting money into the economy via the Fed, we could inject (at least some of the) money into the economy via UBI, although the Fed right now has no mechanism for doing something like that. It would divert money to much better circuits in the economy than the over-bloated and parasitic FIRE sector.
This is a truly interesting discussion. I would add that the Fed - being a privatized organization - is always going to act as an instrument of capital. IMO it will take a national bank to inject money directly into the economy and/or invest in socially-useful large-scale sustainable projects that need large amounts of capital and/or credit.
I agree completely, I have long been a supporter of public banking. Not a huge Warren fan, but I love her idea of a postal savings bank. I would like to something like a national bank that is similar to the Bank of North Dakota.
I think you would really like this book: https://www.plutobooks.com/9780745335544/debt-or-democracy/
the Fed isn’t a privatized organization
In any case, none of this stuff moves without building a critical mass of aware people who are willing to work and fight for the non-violent revolution against capitalism that is required to make any kind of substantive change. Scientifically, climate change does not allow the time to do that. Hopefully, the Grandmother Biosphere will allow humankind to hang around so she can have a few more laughs for awhile.
It’s a public/private organization nominally overseen by Congress. From Wikipedia:
Although an instrument of the US Government, the Federal Reserve System considers itself “an independent central bank because its monetary policy decisions do not have to be approved by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by the Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.”
Nominations, confirmations and resignations
In late December 2011, President Barack Obama nominated Jeremy C. Stein, a Harvard University finance professor and a Democrat, and Jerome Powell, formerly of Dillon Read, Bankers Trust and The Carlyle Group and a Republican. Both candidates also have Treasury Department experience in the Obama and George H. W. Bush administrations respectively.
“Obama administration officials [had] regrouped to identify Fed candidates after Peter Diamond, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, withdrew his nomination to the board in June  in the face of Republican opposition. Richard Clarida, a potential nominee who was a Treasury official under George W. Bush, pulled out of consideration in August ”, one account of the December nominations noted. The two other Obama nominees in 2011, Yellen and Raskin, were confirmed in September. One of the vacancies was created in 2011 with the resignation of Kevin Warsh, who took office in 2006 to fill the unexpired term ending January 31, 2018, and resigned his position effective March 31, 2011. In March 2012, U.S. Senator David Vitter (R, LA) said he would oppose Obama’s Stein and Powell nominations, dampening near-term hopes for approval. However Senate leaders reached a deal, paving the way for affirmative votes on the two nominees in May 2012 and bringing the board to full strength for the first time since 2006 with Duke’s service after term end. Later, on January 6, 2014, the United States Senate confirmed Yellen’s nomination to be Chair of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors; she is slated to be the first woman to hold the position and will become Chair on February 1, 2014. Subsequently, President Obama nominated Stanley Fischer to replace Yellen as the Vice Chair.
In April 2014, Stein announced he was leaving to return to Harvard May 28 with four years remaining on his term. At the time of the announcement, the FOMC “already is down three members as it awaits the Senate confirmation of … Fischer and Lael Brainard, and as [President] Obama has yet to name a replacement for … Duke. … Powell is still serving as he awaits his confirmation for a second term.”
Allan R. Landon, former president and CEO of the Bank of Hawaii, was nominated in early 2015 by President Obama to the board.
In July 2015, President Obama nominated University of Michigan economist Kathryn M. Dominguez to fill the second vacancy on the board. The Senate had not yet acted on Landon’s confirmation by the time of the second nomination.
Daniel Tarullo submitted his resignation from the board on February 10, 2017, effective on or around April 5, 2017.
You look at who OB’s nominees were and look at the Fed’s structure and tell me it’s not privatized and not controlled by capitalists.
You need to look at the ownership structure. Your first paragraph touched on it. Anywho, of course it’s “controlled” by Capitalists. We’re all Capitalists.
“But “jobs for all” is a fantasy, if we’re talking about family-sustaining, living-wage jobs, as we should. The facts make that clear.”
Somebody tell Bernie Sanders.
Explain what you mean by this.
Whether the Fed is private or public is not entirely clear, it is kind of both, and it brags about the independence of the Fed from the federal government as far as the decisions it makes. You can consult the limited auditing of the Fed a few years ago and the horrors it uncovered to determine if that is a good or bad thing, can square that with your view of what is a democracy or a well-functioning republic, and make up your own decisions about Greenspan bragging to congress in the 1990’s about violating its dual mandate, at least in regards to supporting full employment. Money could be created entirely through the Treasury, without the need to expand public debt what so ever like we see with the Fed’s open market operations, and the Treasury is obviously public. Minting coin through the Treasury is actually in the constitution, and the Treasury has created paper money (greenbacks) in the past. A few years ago, someone did a FOIA request for the Fed and the Fed’s argument in arguing against the FOIA was that it was a private organization. The same type of arguments came out when Ron Paul and Alan Grayson pushed for the Fed audit a few years ago.
“Even assuming the information could be derived and produced in the format you seek, the resulting table, like the underlying data set would be a record of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, not the Board. Accordingly, we cannot provide you with any such information.”
_In other words, sure, we’ll admit that the Freedom of Information Act applies to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, but the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco is a private entity, so it’s above the law. _
_Turns out, this same reasoning was used in another famous case: _
This sounded absurd, but I quickly discovered that the Board of Governors had made the exact same defense when Bloomberg News sued the Fed under the FOIA to get the inside story on the bailout of Bear Sterns in 2008. The Fed Board of Governors replied, in effect, “Hey, that wasn’t us, that was the Federal Reserve Bank of New York that bailed out Bear Stearns. And they ain’t subject to the FOIA. Ha-ha!”
_Fortunately, the August 24, 2009 decision by Loretta A. Preska, Chief United States District Judge, in Bloomberg L.P. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System found that the Fed had to pony up to Bloomberg the Bear Sterns documents within five working days. _
So it’s not clear if the Bear Stearns case is a precedent or whether it only applied then. Either way, it seems silly that the Fed Board of Governeors is subject to FOIAs, but not the member banks, especially since that’s where a lot of the action happens.
With so many corporations receiving massive amounts of welfare, I would argue we don’t live under capitalism either.
I would like to know how hiring a robot creates jobs. How clueless and a nine is that?
Hey did you see that moronic Barbie Doll Kelly Ann on a talk show yesterday? Very scary touting and bragging about Dump and how she is a Catholic. This woman looks more like a zombie than a real person.
Not all people are employable as what??? You mean as a one percenter like yourself?
If more people have to live on a UBI then I do not call that living. It’s not even surviving, and not worth existing on this Earth, and for what purpose?