TIME FOR A NEW “NEW DEAL”

This is an older article by Marshall Auerback, but one of the best about what was done by FDR, and what should now be done.

But consider the historic precedents. In the words of Professor Paul Davidson:

Let us look at a historical example where if this type of “what will cost to the tax payer and/or the economy?” question were asked, one of the most desirable government policies would never have been undertaken. At the Bretton Woods conference it was recognized that the European nations would need significant aid to help rebuild their economies after the war. Keynes estimated that the need would be between $12 and $15 billion. U.S. representative Harry Dexter White indicated that Congress could not ask the taxpayers to provide more than $3 billion. Accordingly, the Keynes Plan was defeated at Bretton Woods, and the Dexter White proposals were adopted:

Suppose that in 1946 it was recommended that U.S. give a gift of $13 billion dollars over four years to various European countries to help them rebuild their war-ravaged economies (in 1940s current dollars, this sum would be well over $150 billion in 2007 dollars). Obviously if Dexter White was correct, the Congress would never have approved the Marshall Plan. Since the Marshall Plan did not reveal in advance that it would provide foreign governments $13 billion over a period of four years, Congress approved the Marshall Pan. The Marshall Plan gave foreign nations approximately two percent of the United States’ GDP each year for four years. Was the Marshall Plan costly to U.S. taxpayers and the U.S. economy?

The statistics indicate that, during the Marshall Plan years, for the first time in history the U.S. did not experience a serious economic slowdown immediately after a war. And this despite the fact that federal government expenditures on goods and services declined by approximately 57 percent between 1945 and 1946. Furthermore, four years after World War II, federal government expenditure was still approximately half of what it had been in 1945.

When the U.S. emerged from World War II, the federal debt was more than 100 percent of the GDP. Accordingly, there was great political pressure to reign in federal government spending to make sure that the federal debt did not grow substantially. Clearly, then, it was not “Keynesian” deficit spending that kept the U.S. out of recession in the immediate post-World War II years.

What was the cost of the Marshall Plan to the U.S. economy and the U.S. taxpayer? In 1946, the GDP per capita was 25 percent higher than it had been in the last peace years before the War. GDP per capita continued to grow during the Marshall Plan years. Despite giving away two percent of U.S. GDP, American residents (and taxpayers) experienced a higher standard of living each year. – (Paul Davidson, “How to Solve the US Housing Problem and Avoid a Recession: A Revived HOLC and RTC” - Schwartz Center For Economic Policy Analysis: Policy Note, January 2008)
(Continue...)

Intra-Objective Communication of the Subjective…

Hi SB, good post. I’m trying to find a compliable ground of communication between your ideas of, let’s just use Lesley’s term__altruism, to generally represent part of your ideas, as your geometric ideas are not in dispute with my ideas__to show possible areas of union between your totalities of ideas and mine.

We need a middle ground of passing right brained altruistic ideas into the pragmatic and practical ground of left brained logical, social and material reality. This is why I’ve so often mentioned ‘esthetics’ as the idea that can convert the right brain volitions, altruism, etc., into left brained values of liberty, etc., which are compatible and compliable with left brained mixed pragmatism, yet a more incentivized right brained altruism, and a less incentivized left brained greed, than we presently have. What I’m meaning is a method of wedding infinite psychology, the objective substrate of science, into a more finite possibility of true social improvement, possibly through a new intra-objective communication of the subjective, without losing any of the value of the subjective contributions to social reality.

I think we are both looking for a universal algorithm of both geometry and evolution, which is fully compatible with both hemisphere’s of the minds. The algorithm must be capable of passing right brained psychology into left brained reality__in other words, how do infinite intuitions plug into finite concepts? Imo, this algorithm is more solvable at the international actions level of the interactions of nations, than as a personal algorithm, since nations’ epistemology has reduced the complexity to less terms involved. At this level there are three major methods of solving differences, 1.politics, 2.money, and 3.war. Of course, the method that relates universally from the international level to the personal is 1.the political__and I don’t think the personal-political has yet been explored thoroughly enough, by us or anyone else, as a real solution. I think it may allow us access to the universal algorithm we are seeking.

Selfless-Semi-Altruistic Government --> E=1/5X --> The Geometry of Incentivized Liberty…

100% Altruism = No Altruism__So, the solution must be a semi-systemic solution --> E=1/5X…

The old method was Pareto’s 80%-20% law, of poverty to wealth ratio. Presently, it’s about 90%-10% market law, of poverty to wealth ratio. The selfless-semi-altruistic government of a fully geometric incentivized liberty, would be about a 60%-40% law, of middle-class well-being of all, to wealth ratio__A much fairer and sensible ratio…

The E=1/5X ratio of selfless-semi-altruistic government is a public owned market system, in competition against private owned free-market greed, to allow public and private market laws to be sliding time scale changed, to the 60%-40% ratio over ten years__to work the magic of the most for all, and the esthetic best order possible__as a partially incentivized system is absolutely necessary to rescue all citizens from the horrors of a possible totalitarian communism, down the road__as history clearly shows, any nation can easily evolve into the despised totalitarianisms, as even past democracies have…

We must get America, and the rest of the world back to a sensible scientific methodology of actionable intelligence, or all our gooses are cooked__Mother Goose in the nuclear frying pan, ain’t a pretty picture, but that’s where we’re headed, if we don’t wake up…

The sliding time scaled laws, I’m referring to, must have real teeth__that means a minimum absolute fine of 10% of total gross value of businesses and corporations not complying__Otherwise, we have no chance of any form of semi-altruistic-government, what-so-ever…

Welcome to the future…