How to fix #Capitalism.

1. Cap enterprise size to 100 people. No more than 100 people are allowed to work for a company in any form.
2. Cap the number of companies a person can own to 1.
3. Cap the wealth any human can own to a fixed multiple of the minimum wealth a human own (eg 2x or 3x)

I donโ€™t know if I want Capitalism anyway, but this is the only way it can work (except a planetary war that kill 99.99% of population, obviously).
My insight so far is that we are moving to the War scenario.

@Shamar what you are suggesting is regulation to contain a symptom of a badly set system, but there are just some easy adjustaments to radically change the system, make it self-adjusting and get a postkeynesian one that mix liberalism and socialism. The first, most important step is Job Guarantee programs as described by Modern Monetary Theory, because it can reverse the Capitalistic pyramid of exploitation...


I don't know much about "Job Guarantee", any link to suggest?

I'm always a bit skeptic of lower bounds to a dynamic variable.

Take #UBI: it's proposed by tycoons like Musk or Zuckerberg because they know it means slavery in their hands without the issues of slavery management.

Give everybody a UBI and price will go up. That's it.

To make UBI work you need an upper bound too, such as a Max Possible Income: whatever goes beyond is turned to public services and commons.


JG is very different from UBI, that is generally criticized by MMTers, though Pavlina Tcherneva studied how to combine JG & UBI.

The very first to mention JG was Martin Luther King and the first economist who studied it was Hyman Minsky.

On the other hand MMT has its origins in Marx, Knapp, Kalecki, Keynes, Lerner, Minsky, Kaldor and Godley and the ones who formulated actual MMT are Mosler, Wray and Mitchell.

After 25 years of development, MMT is becoming very popular now.



Stephanie Kelton, a major MMT proponents, is Bernie Sanders economist and the new star of USA politics, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, talks about JG and Green New Deal, mentioning MMT principles as arguments.

One of these principles is that unemployment is a consequence of an economic system in which taxes are levied to give value to a currency of the State but the latter does not take advantage of this to perform enough public spending to reach full employment.



With JG programs anyone can get a job in public sector while waiting for proposals from private sector. But JG is not just a way to reach full employment. In fact it is basically the opposite of Reserve army of labour that Marx criticized: instead of having a tank of unemployed workers that pull down the salaries and rights of the other workers we would have a tank of workers for the public sector with minimum salary and rights guaranteed.



JG would be the pad between public and private sectors: in fact the latter can take advantage of an economic expansion employing more workers but to do so it must offer better working conditions and salary than JG and this means sharing the profits of the economic expansions. This is what really reverses the pyramid of exploitation.

More details:

Look also for acticles by Stephanie Kelton, Randall Wray and Pavlina Tcherneva. Warren Mosler for more on MMT.



This is very interesting.

I admit I discover myself completely ignorant of this stuff.

I see some practical problems though: even assuming we tax riches enough to sustain JG (because you need resources to do this) you need to decide what to do with this workforce.

It's not a trivial task.

Also there is the problem of actually making some people work (since they can't loss that job) without hurting their rights and long term interest (that is: how to not fallback to a UBI?).

@Shamar @alexl what you say it's true: you need resources to sustain JG. But money is not a real resource. Money is basically unlimited for any currency-issuing country (which Italy is not, sadly), the only constraint is the availability of actual real resources (workforce, skills, natural resources).

This doesn't mean taxes are useless or we shouldn't tax the riches. But this means that JG is at least financially sustainable.

@gabriele @alexl

Money is not a real resource, but is an expression of the military force of a state (as Weber said in other terms).

If a state has not the power to impose its own money with the force (which Italy has not, as is evident if you look how Camorra, Ndrangeta and Mafia prosper here) its money is worth nothing.

What you say would be right on a global (or galaxy level) government, though.

Meanwhile, as an abstraction any fiat currency is either artificially limited or useless.

@gabriele @alexl

NOTE: I agree that what REALLY matters are the actual resources (workforce, culture, natural resources), but even with a revolution on a country level (say Brexit like) people wouldn't get money by printing currency, they would lose them.

Unless (again) if they menage to be TOTALLY autonomous on all production lines AND very strong at defending their boundaries.

It's not a case that GB is looking more and more for USA's protection (very ironically, if you think about it).


@Shamar @alexl I see what Weber meant, but I don't think this is really still the case in 21st century. If anything, how would Japan, which doesn't even have an army, be able to sustain its huge debt monetization program? Bank of Japan in the last decade created huge amounts of money out of thin air, becoming the sole buyer of government bonds, which, in turn, have the lowest yield rate on the world (JP is one of the very few countries to have a negative spread with GER)

ยท Tusky ยท 1 ยท 0 ยท 0

@Shamar @alexl
Japan proves at least 3 things:
1) it's indeed possible to sustain large budget deficits without necessarily having high inflation rate.
2) with a fixed exchange rate, balance of trade will eventually adjust itself (this also explains, in part, why inflation is still low).
3) the yield of government bonds has nothing to do with what the financial markets think or feel, only a central bank has the power to ultimately set the rates.

@gabriele @alexl

I don't know much about Japan (my bad... actually I know almost nothing), but my insight is that there are several important non-economical dimensions that explain its peculiarity.
And not all of its peculiarities are scalable beyond its dimension, geolocation and culture.

1) maybe (even the US are on the same boat, but they have an army)
3) fine

2) Not sure I understand, but if you just mean that at the end the market settles, sure! Just people die in the process.

@Shamar @gabriele

And about possible jobs in JG, MMT promoters often mention social care and policies for the Environment and in general whatever is overlooked by the private sector because it generates few profits or none.

There will always be something to do, from maintenance of public infrastructures to scientific research, from transition to new and more sustainable technologies of energy and goods production to cultural initiatives.

After all, humanity is still in its infancy.

Accedi per partecipare alla conversazione

This is a single-user Mastodon instance, home of Gabriele Lucci's profile and toots.