I agree with Whitman about the inflated salaries of the Union Leadership,
but I am not aligned with the Ownership Class that she speaks primarily
for, though not always to...
How can a Union Leader be sensitive to the plight of workers when
reimbursed so highly? Such highly compensated "workers" are more likely to
identify with the living conditions and opinions and views of the moneyed
elite.
We have to understand that the fundamental inflation brought about by
supply side economics has had a paralyzing effect on commerce by DRIVING
the prices of Real Estate, Capital, and forcing Organized and unorganized
Labor into the untenable position of demanding, but most often not receiving,
wages that allow workers to keep up.
We need to grab the economic bull by the horns by forming an all-inclusive
Equity Union from which we can deal with the fundamental Accounting
Principle that United Assets minus United Liabilities equals United Equity
and take the necessary steps to bring the costs of living back to earth and
work for a parity in wages, while working together to produce good jobs and
equity opportunities for all in an ecological economic redevelopment plan
that understands and adjusts for real world resource constraints.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity,
Mike Morin
Eugene, OR, USA
Showing posts with label supply side economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supply side economics. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Economic Paradigm Change and World Equity Union
Thanks for chiming in, Steve.
Yes, if only we knew 30 years ago, what we know now...
??????????????????
We did have much more of a window of opportunity before the disastrous inflationary onset of supply side economics.
Repopulating farmland with smaller farms and a unified world policy of moving towards self-sufficiency in all regions needs to occur.
Two major obstacles to our potential for human progress are:
1.) The resistance that the greedy and self-interested holding what they believe to be a competitive advantage in a genocidal, ecocidal, suicidal economic game manifesting itself in either honestly naive, but more likely disingenuous "free-market/invisible handed" fanaticism...who refuse to come forward to cooperate with a plan and implement modus operandi based on human needs and the reality of a finite planet.
2.) The terrible inflation caused by the supply side economics generation which has driven the cost of real and capital assets outside the reach of almost all, who might want to take an economic risk within a mythical entrepreneurial opportunities environment (e.g. buy and operate a small farm).
The only solution that I see to this latter problem is the formation of a world equity/assets unions which would allow us to write off the inflated "market rates" to the level where a new generation of communitarian/mutualist/socialist commerce can be started.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity,
Mike Morin
World Peoples' Equity Union
Eugene, OR, USA
(541) 343-3808
Yes, if only we knew 30 years ago, what we know now...
??????????????????
We did have much more of a window of opportunity before the disastrous inflationary onset of supply side economics.
Repopulating farmland with smaller farms and a unified world policy of moving towards self-sufficiency in all regions needs to occur.
Two major obstacles to our potential for human progress are:
1.) The resistance that the greedy and self-interested holding what they believe to be a competitive advantage in a genocidal, ecocidal, suicidal economic game manifesting itself in either honestly naive, but more likely disingenuous "free-market/invisible handed" fanaticism...who refuse to come forward to cooperate with a plan and implement modus operandi based on human needs and the reality of a finite planet.
2.) The terrible inflation caused by the supply side economics generation which has driven the cost of real and capital assets outside the reach of almost all, who might want to take an economic risk within a mythical entrepreneurial opportunities environment (e.g. buy and operate a small farm).
The only solution that I see to this latter problem is the formation of a world equity/assets unions which would allow us to write off the inflated "market rates" to the level where a new generation of communitarian/mutualist/socialist commerce can be started.
In Peace, Friendship, Community, Cooperation, and Solidarity,
Mike Morin
World Peoples' Equity Union
Eugene, OR, USA
(541) 343-3808
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Education and Socialism
Dan Crow's article was interesting and I wonder if it is a trend in all University settings.
His article, so much like most "publish or perish" publications was more than a bit verbose, so I admit that I took to skimming it after about 5 paragraphs.
One very important thing that he seemed not to mention (unless I missed it), was the increasined dominance of Corporate Capitalist funding and its effect on the direction that research and teaching has taken, always extant but, particularly since the advent and momentum of the supply-side economic surge and debacle (i.e. Reaganomics, full-spead ahead (to destruction) Monetarism, Econometrics, etc.).
We now find ourselves in need of a radical fundamental paradigm shift with respect to an economy based on rational resource allocation rather than financial speculation, and with respect to restructuring our economic system to support the evolution to a inclusive, humane, equitable, quality of life, sustainable, peaceful one that employs a plan and implement modus operandi dedicated and committed to ecological economic redevelopment.
In Peace, Friendship, Cooperation, and Sustainability,
Mike Morin
His article, so much like most "publish or perish" publications was more than a bit verbose, so I admit that I took to skimming it after about 5 paragraphs.
One very important thing that he seemed not to mention (unless I missed it), was the increasined dominance of Corporate Capitalist funding and its effect on the direction that research and teaching has taken, always extant but, particularly since the advent and momentum of the supply-side economic surge and debacle (i.e. Reaganomics, full-spead ahead (to destruction) Monetarism, Econometrics, etc.).
We now find ourselves in need of a radical fundamental paradigm shift with respect to an economy based on rational resource allocation rather than financial speculation, and with respect to restructuring our economic system to support the evolution to a inclusive, humane, equitable, quality of life, sustainable, peaceful one that employs a plan and implement modus operandi dedicated and committed to ecological economic redevelopment.
In Peace, Friendship, Cooperation, and Sustainability,
Mike Morin
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
The Fallacy of Supply Side Economics
Despite the proclamation of Say's "Law". Supply DOES NOT create its own demand. Sure, supply creates some demand, but the siting of production facilities based on the availability of cheapest resources (and) labo(u)r cause a crisis in Capitalism and especially the last generation of global exploitation and supply side foolishness. The additional costs of distribution and competition need to be factored in, as not so well. The lack of effective demand will not support the greed-driven "maximize your utils" insanity of Classical, neo-classical, Reagonomics, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Geithner, and the Yuppie scum.
We must start with a complete restructuring of the financial systems. I have outlined and explained this in relative laymens' terms, very concisely.
Notice, I never use the word reform any more, due to the reactionary behaviour that it elicits.
It is my hope that you will accept the basic tenets of the Peoples' Equity Union and work with me to see that such a revolution is implemented.
Thank you.
We must start with a complete restructuring of the financial systems. I have outlined and explained this in relative laymens' terms, very concisely.
Notice, I never use the word reform any more, due to the reactionary behaviour that it elicits.
It is my hope that you will accept the basic tenets of the Peoples' Equity Union and work with me to see that such a revolution is implemented.
Thank you.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Units of Trust
Stephen,
The "units of trust" scenario thatyou are describing sounds like a community/worker hybrid cooperative, where the community members and the workers of local distribution and production units own EQUITY shares in the various units.
The Mondragon system in the Basque Region of Spain started out similar to such a model and there is a cooperative food store, somewhere in North Carolina, that is set up as a community/worker cooperative.
Let's take a cooperative food store as an example. The difficult part of such an arrangement would be to balance the interests of the community with the interests of the workers. If it was a wealthy community then members might want to donate a premium for each purchase to increase the wealth of the workers. If the workers were wealthy (quite unlikely all up and down the distribution and production channels of food and associated necessities) then a patronage refund and/or dividend would be distributed to the community owners.
No need for banks, but equity unions could be helpful.
For example, in todays' post-supply-side economy, there is a tremendous over-abundance of assets, although many would be of questionable quality and/or utility. In the formula of Equity = Assets - Liabilities, it is very hard to determine where these Corporate Conglomerate Capitalists stand as the Capitalists have the very unethical practice of moving their money as suits their own personal interests and not those of the workers or any aspect of the environment.
To the holders of the over-supply, the lack of effective demand for that over-supply is a liability to the owners of those assets. But what is the equity position of those owners? Only holding Capitalists accountable for the asset over-supply situation that they created will help to transition to a rational distribution of goods.
Only an international equity union can manage such a transition.
In other words, take the money and run must not be allowed!!!!
The "units of trust" scenario thatyou are describing sounds like a community/worker hybrid cooperative, where the community members and the workers of local distribution and production units own EQUITY shares in the various units.
The Mondragon system in the Basque Region of Spain started out similar to such a model and there is a cooperative food store, somewhere in North Carolina, that is set up as a community/worker cooperative.
Let's take a cooperative food store as an example. The difficult part of such an arrangement would be to balance the interests of the community with the interests of the workers. If it was a wealthy community then members might want to donate a premium for each purchase to increase the wealth of the workers. If the workers were wealthy (quite unlikely all up and down the distribution and production channels of food and associated necessities) then a patronage refund and/or dividend would be distributed to the community owners.
No need for banks, but equity unions could be helpful.
For example, in todays' post-supply-side economy, there is a tremendous over-abundance of assets, although many would be of questionable quality and/or utility. In the formula of Equity = Assets - Liabilities, it is very hard to determine where these Corporate Conglomerate Capitalists stand as the Capitalists have the very unethical practice of moving their money as suits their own personal interests and not those of the workers or any aspect of the environment.
To the holders of the over-supply, the lack of effective demand for that over-supply is a liability to the owners of those assets. But what is the equity position of those owners? Only holding Capitalists accountable for the asset over-supply situation that they created will help to transition to a rational distribution of goods.
Only an international equity union can manage such a transition.
In other words, take the money and run must not be allowed!!!!
Friday, December 26, 2008
Demand Side Management, Energy, and Reform
I would like to address the supply side scenario for energy production based on assumptions of economic growth requiring an increase in the use of energy.
The trouble with focusing on supply side economics and energy is that they both ignore demand. In relation to economics, the lack of effective demand for the plethora of consumer products will prove to be the downfall of this past generation’s experiment with supply side economics. With respect to energy, we must recognize that demand side management is critical to any possibility of a sustainable future. Liberal economics (laissez faire, the so-called free market) can not deal with the problem(s). We need a planned economy to effectively retrofit the infrastructure and to rebuild our communities to be walkable, therefore eliminating the terrible daily waste of oil/energy resources for transportation purposes.
I have to differ with rosy scenarios regarding the contribution that photovoltaics can make. I’m not an electrical engineer or an electrician, but it is my understanding that PVs don’t have the oomph (be it voltage, amperage, and/or wattage) to contribute very significantly to the current and recommended increased usage of electricity. Sure, PVs and wind might be able to contribute to lighting applications and a few very high efficiency appliances, but they can not power our transportation, industrial, business, and home heating and air conditioning, hot water, agricultural inputs, refrigeration, drying, and cooking needs.
We could go full throttle to the building of nuclear power plants, but I am highly leery of their toxicity and safety issues. Even if we pursued the path of electrification with the maximization of nuclear power, it will require a tremendous overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, and other applications currently met by oil products, coal, and natural gas.
First of all, nuclear is not a “free market” technology. Government programs paid for most of the resources for development of such. Then, there is the waste issue. Is it not the Federal Government who is going to or proposing to pay for the waste depository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada)? Also, there is the issue of bringing back the so-called Price-Anderson legislation. This was legislation in which the Federal Government provided insurance for nuclear power plants and related operations. No private insurer would underwrite the risks, thus the Feds had to step in.
Perhaps a better scenario could be realized if we started very soon with a planned economy that focused first on economic and energy demand side management and also retrofitted infrastructures with respect to very scarce and relatively clean (I view carbon resources, if appropriately used, to be cleaner than nuclear) energy applications.
The potential for solar thermal hot water is immense, especially with such hot water heaters equipped with concave magnifying lenses to concentrate the rays of the sun. Imagine all hot water demanding properties on the planet equipped with such devices. Imagine all the (community/worker owned) jobs involved with the production, installation, and distribution of these units. I list distribution last, because all efforts need to be made to maximize the localization of such production and installation, as well as any other products for which going towards relocalization may be possible (e.g. food).
Relocalization is part of the plan (and not just for food). Instead of reversalism, the term that the author Staniford has coined as being emblematic of the relocalization paradigm, let me offer the following "re" words that imply a gradual evolution to a future which incorporates the best of the past, for your consideration, response, and action.
Reformation
Little to no beneficial change will occur without an almost religious change from the paradigm of economic growth and standard of living to one that emphasizes community redevelopment and quality of life. This is an important educational component of an alternative ecological economic plan.
Reorganization
If we can be successful and realize the educational/reform component, the next (concurrent) step is to reorganize to one of cooperative (or at least partially so – we will probably need to compromise on the divide between one dollar/one vote and one person/one vote as the dominant paradigm of economic organization) communitarian local and regional economic entities, at least until the day that we are all nearly equal in terms of ownership of the means and goods of production and distribution. How to assure the transition from inequality is problematic. However, as the entire economic system begins and proceeds to fail, those wealthy seeking to avoid total financial ruin will welcome the opportunity to accept the quality of life paradigm, foregoing their opulent, ostentatious, enslaving, ecocidal, genocidal, and suicidal "standard of living" modus operandi.
Reallocation
We need coordinated regional planning agencies that agree on the fundamental mission of a global ecological economy that have the two basic pillars of sustainability and equity. These “planning” agencies would work together and with the local/regional economic entities to determine how resources are allocated to and within communities based on the relocalization paradigm and other governing principles. The vehicle, That I envision here is a Peoples’ Equity Union with “branches” in all communities/neighborhoods.
Restructuring
Communities will need to be physically rebuilt to make them walkable (i.e. new urbanism, retrofitting residential communities built in the oil/automobile age by building
community economic and cultural centers making necessities and other important quality of life amenities available to all within walking distance of their homes). Included in such a plan would be neighborhood work stations which would aid in the ability of office workers to telecommute in their occupations as we transition from a Capitalist economy to a Socialist one. Imagine all the jobs!
Reducing
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
To post a comment, either click on the title of this essay, or click on the small print on the bottom that says either, "0 comments", "1 comment", "2 comments", etc.
The trouble with focusing on supply side economics and energy is that they both ignore demand. In relation to economics, the lack of effective demand for the plethora of consumer products will prove to be the downfall of this past generation’s experiment with supply side economics. With respect to energy, we must recognize that demand side management is critical to any possibility of a sustainable future. Liberal economics (laissez faire, the so-called free market) can not deal with the problem(s). We need a planned economy to effectively retrofit the infrastructure and to rebuild our communities to be walkable, therefore eliminating the terrible daily waste of oil/energy resources for transportation purposes.
I have to differ with rosy scenarios regarding the contribution that photovoltaics can make. I’m not an electrical engineer or an electrician, but it is my understanding that PVs don’t have the oomph (be it voltage, amperage, and/or wattage) to contribute very significantly to the current and recommended increased usage of electricity. Sure, PVs and wind might be able to contribute to lighting applications and a few very high efficiency appliances, but they can not power our transportation, industrial, business, and home heating and air conditioning, hot water, agricultural inputs, refrigeration, drying, and cooking needs.
We could go full throttle to the building of nuclear power plants, but I am highly leery of their toxicity and safety issues. Even if we pursued the path of electrification with the maximization of nuclear power, it will require a tremendous overhaul of our transportation infrastructure, and other applications currently met by oil products, coal, and natural gas.
First of all, nuclear is not a “free market” technology. Government programs paid for most of the resources for development of such. Then, there is the waste issue. Is it not the Federal Government who is going to or proposing to pay for the waste depository at Yucca Mountain (Nevada)? Also, there is the issue of bringing back the so-called Price-Anderson legislation. This was legislation in which the Federal Government provided insurance for nuclear power plants and related operations. No private insurer would underwrite the risks, thus the Feds had to step in.
Perhaps a better scenario could be realized if we started very soon with a planned economy that focused first on economic and energy demand side management and also retrofitted infrastructures with respect to very scarce and relatively clean (I view carbon resources, if appropriately used, to be cleaner than nuclear) energy applications.
The potential for solar thermal hot water is immense, especially with such hot water heaters equipped with concave magnifying lenses to concentrate the rays of the sun. Imagine all hot water demanding properties on the planet equipped with such devices. Imagine all the (community/worker owned) jobs involved with the production, installation, and distribution of these units. I list distribution last, because all efforts need to be made to maximize the localization of such production and installation, as well as any other products for which going towards relocalization may be possible (e.g. food).
Relocalization is part of the plan (and not just for food). Instead of reversalism, the term that the author Staniford has coined as being emblematic of the relocalization paradigm, let me offer the following "re" words that imply a gradual evolution to a future which incorporates the best of the past, for your consideration, response, and action.
Reformation
Little to no beneficial change will occur without an almost religious change from the paradigm of economic growth and standard of living to one that emphasizes community redevelopment and quality of life. This is an important educational component of an alternative ecological economic plan.
Reorganization
If we can be successful and realize the educational/reform component, the next (concurrent) step is to reorganize to one of cooperative (or at least partially so – we will probably need to compromise on the divide between one dollar/one vote and one person/one vote as the dominant paradigm of economic organization) communitarian local and regional economic entities, at least until the day that we are all nearly equal in terms of ownership of the means and goods of production and distribution. How to assure the transition from inequality is problematic. However, as the entire economic system begins and proceeds to fail, those wealthy seeking to avoid total financial ruin will welcome the opportunity to accept the quality of life paradigm, foregoing their opulent, ostentatious, enslaving, ecocidal, genocidal, and suicidal "standard of living" modus operandi.
Reallocation
We need coordinated regional planning agencies that agree on the fundamental mission of a global ecological economy that have the two basic pillars of sustainability and equity. These “planning” agencies would work together and with the local/regional economic entities to determine how resources are allocated to and within communities based on the relocalization paradigm and other governing principles. The vehicle, That I envision here is a Peoples’ Equity Union with “branches” in all communities/neighborhoods.
Restructuring
Communities will need to be physically rebuilt to make them walkable (i.e. new urbanism, retrofitting residential communities built in the oil/automobile age by building
community economic and cultural centers making necessities and other important quality of life amenities available to all within walking distance of their homes). Included in such a plan would be neighborhood work stations which would aid in the ability of office workers to telecommute in their occupations as we transition from a Capitalist economy to a Socialist one. Imagine all the jobs!
Reducing
Reduce, reuse, recycle.
To post a comment, either click on the title of this essay, or click on the small print on the bottom that says either, "0 comments", "1 comment", "2 comments", etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
