Dalio also conflates public and private debt, and fails to address the questions of to whom these different kinds of debt obligations are owed and in what are these obligations denominated … there are more convincing and historically and conceptually more robust understandings of credit cycles than those of Dalio’s “grand theory”; start with Minsky and Arrighi from two different traditions.
I like MMT economist Stephanie Kelton’s phrase for those like Xu Gao et al who understand how nations with sovereign currencies operate and why they can never go broke or be unable to pay their debts: she refers to them as “Deficit Owls.” I believe her book “The Deficit Myth” is now available in Mandarin in China.
Zhao Jian (赵建) Is NOT "a renowned macroeconomist and head of the Xijing Research Institute". He is a professor at 济南大学 Jinan University in Shandong Province, a 3rd-tier university. His 西京研究院 "Xijing Research Institute" has almost no one noticeable except himself. He is no doubt very loud. But he has far thinner credentials than Xu Gao and others.
It is implausible that leaders from the global financial markets like Ray Dalio have such a poor understanding of macroeconomics.
It is more plausible that they choose to impose an economic narrative and ideology that suits their narrow self interests even if that ideology is generally harmful to the public, to the productive economy and to the nation. The neo-classical economists which Ray Dalio appears to align with, want high unemployment, suppressed wages, increasingly precarious working conditions, degrading government services, smaller government, the privatisation of government functions and assets, deregulation of finance - all so that the global financial markets can buy up cheaply global assets of all kinds including homes and the sellers of everything we consume, impose rents on the necessities of life and manipulate markets using commercial bank credit fueled speculation to deliberately create market booms and busts. Goldman Sachs is famous for engineering market booms and busts, both of which can be very profitable if your timing is reasonably accurate and especially if you are bailed out by the central bank in the event of insolvency or a general freezing up of the whole national or global banking system, such as during the 2007-2009 GFC.
The world of big business and especially the bankers centred in the United States, generally resented Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal, the dominant role of government during WWII and the Keynesian full employment period of high economic growth up to the Middle East oil embargo of the early 1970's. They saw this period as being too Socialist and went against their perceived golden era of capitalism of unrestrained greed and power of the 19th century. In the 1970's trade unions then were strong, the environmental movement had become powerful, consumer rights organisations became strong, taxation was high, military spending on the Cold War was high, the anti-war movements were strong and the mass media was often supportive of this 'progressive' agenda. Trade protection was also generally excessive.
When inflation rose to high levels due to the high price of oil and wages generally keeping pace with inflation, the world of big business took advantage of this situation and they fought back. The famous Powell Memorandum of 23 August 1971 was a key turning point that prepared the ground for the subsequent systematic political coup d'etat by the world of big business. The monetarist/neo-classical economists that suited the world of big business were systematically placed in control of central banks, finance ministries, in academia, in politics and in the media.
The previously dominant Keynesian economists were demonised and were sidelined over the 1970's in all of the Western World and the result has been the 50 year neoliberal era which has led to an enormous growth of speculation driven wealth, the financialisation of economies, the rise of rentier capitalism, the increasing concentration of corporate power leading to ever increasing cartel like or even vulture like behaviour and the general destruction of much of the productive economy in the West, in which China's modern role was an integral planned part, regardless of the geopolitical risks for the West, which are now becoming evident.
China and the West would be wise to regulate the commercial banking sector so that investment into productive capacity remains the primary role and purge neo-classical economists from all macroeconomic roles. China and the West would also be wise to improve government services such as healthcare, education and the social safety net which will also increase consumption and reduce the incentive to save a large share of income. A MMT informed nationally funded and locally administered Job Guarantee program that would also enable the full fiscal capacity of the national government to be harnessed makes sense for all nations.
Heterodox theses on ways of interpreting the economy are welcome, but let us never forget that the economy is political and monetary economics should represent only a small part of the story.
Dalio also conflates public and private debt, and fails to address the questions of to whom these different kinds of debt obligations are owed and in what are these obligations denominated … there are more convincing and historically and conceptually more robust understandings of credit cycles than those of Dalio’s “grand theory”; start with Minsky and Arrighi from two different traditions.
I like MMT economist Stephanie Kelton’s phrase for those like Xu Gao et al who understand how nations with sovereign currencies operate and why they can never go broke or be unable to pay their debts: she refers to them as “Deficit Owls.” I believe her book “The Deficit Myth” is now available in Mandarin in China.
Zhao Jian (赵建) Is NOT "a renowned macroeconomist and head of the Xijing Research Institute". He is a professor at 济南大学 Jinan University in Shandong Province, a 3rd-tier university. His 西京研究院 "Xijing Research Institute" has almost no one noticeable except himself. He is no doubt very loud. But he has far thinner credentials than Xu Gao and others.
It is implausible that leaders from the global financial markets like Ray Dalio have such a poor understanding of macroeconomics.
It is more plausible that they choose to impose an economic narrative and ideology that suits their narrow self interests even if that ideology is generally harmful to the public, to the productive economy and to the nation. The neo-classical economists which Ray Dalio appears to align with, want high unemployment, suppressed wages, increasingly precarious working conditions, degrading government services, smaller government, the privatisation of government functions and assets, deregulation of finance - all so that the global financial markets can buy up cheaply global assets of all kinds including homes and the sellers of everything we consume, impose rents on the necessities of life and manipulate markets using commercial bank credit fueled speculation to deliberately create market booms and busts. Goldman Sachs is famous for engineering market booms and busts, both of which can be very profitable if your timing is reasonably accurate and especially if you are bailed out by the central bank in the event of insolvency or a general freezing up of the whole national or global banking system, such as during the 2007-2009 GFC.
The world of big business and especially the bankers centred in the United States, generally resented Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal, the dominant role of government during WWII and the Keynesian full employment period of high economic growth up to the Middle East oil embargo of the early 1970's. They saw this period as being too Socialist and went against their perceived golden era of capitalism of unrestrained greed and power of the 19th century. In the 1970's trade unions then were strong, the environmental movement had become powerful, consumer rights organisations became strong, taxation was high, military spending on the Cold War was high, the anti-war movements were strong and the mass media was often supportive of this 'progressive' agenda. Trade protection was also generally excessive.
When inflation rose to high levels due to the high price of oil and wages generally keeping pace with inflation, the world of big business took advantage of this situation and they fought back. The famous Powell Memorandum of 23 August 1971 was a key turning point that prepared the ground for the subsequent systematic political coup d'etat by the world of big business. The monetarist/neo-classical economists that suited the world of big business were systematically placed in control of central banks, finance ministries, in academia, in politics and in the media.
The previously dominant Keynesian economists were demonised and were sidelined over the 1970's in all of the Western World and the result has been the 50 year neoliberal era which has led to an enormous growth of speculation driven wealth, the financialisation of economies, the rise of rentier capitalism, the increasing concentration of corporate power leading to ever increasing cartel like or even vulture like behaviour and the general destruction of much of the productive economy in the West, in which China's modern role was an integral planned part, regardless of the geopolitical risks for the West, which are now becoming evident.
China and the West would be wise to regulate the commercial banking sector so that investment into productive capacity remains the primary role and purge neo-classical economists from all macroeconomic roles. China and the West would also be wise to improve government services such as healthcare, education and the social safety net which will also increase consumption and reduce the incentive to save a large share of income. A MMT informed nationally funded and locally administered Job Guarantee program that would also enable the full fiscal capacity of the national government to be harnessed makes sense for all nations.
Heterodox theses on ways of interpreting the economy are welcome, but let us never forget that the economy is political and monetary economics should represent only a small part of the story.
Marxism is always a good place to start.
印钞为王：减税到0
print money kill levy
https://x.com/mmtchina/status/1855780349982253385