Mosler-ek nazioarteko merkataritzako eta zerga-sistemako modelo erraz bat aurkeztu du Trumponomcis zer den erakusteko.
In Border tax comments, Redbook retail sales, International trade, Consumer confidence
(i) Istorioa1
(ii) Makro ekonomiaren ikuspuntutik, atzerritar merkataritza enpresa bat balitz bezala kontsideraturik: esportatzen duzuna barruan hartuz eta inportatzen duzuna banatuz2
(iii) Esportazioak kostua eta inportazioak onura3, produktibitatea eta barneko ekonomia
(iv) Lanpostuak eta produktibitatea4
(v) Langabezia5
(vi) Langabezia eta zerbitzu sektorea6
(vii) Muga zerga enpleguak sortzeko?7 Don Rumsfeld-en aipua
(viii) Muga zerga inportazioan jartzea autoak ez erosteko eta barneko autoak egiteko enplegu gehiago, eta alderantziz, zerga txikitzea zuhaitzen esportazioan, zuhaitzak mozteko eta itsasontziratzeko8
(ix) Ondorioak
(Let’s assume that’s what happened and look at those consequences.)
(a) Herrialdea okerrago dago9
(b) Irabazleak eta galtzaileak: kasurik onenean (‘best case‘) gehiago lan egiten dugu gauza bera lortzeko10
(c) Produktibitatea baxuagoa da, bizitza estandarra jaitsiz, lana produkzio kostu erreala izanik11
(d) Lana ez da mozkin ekonomikoa. Lanaren mozkin ekonomikoa produzitutako outputa da. Outputa kontsumorako da12
(e) Kasurik onenean, muga zergak ez du enplegurik sortu eta langabezia arazo politikoa da13
(f) Egokitze fiskala da Mosler-en lehen aukera : zerga mozte bat ala gastu handitze bat14
(g) Modu horretan honelakoak lortzen ditugu: barneko output gehiago kontsumitzeko, gehi inportatutako autoak, zuhaitz estra atzerrira eman gabe15
Gobernuaren ikuspuntutik,
(And how does it look from the government’s point of view?)
(h) Gobernuak espero du diru-sarrera estra, inportatutako autoen gaineko zergagatik, esportatzaileentzako zerga mozkinetatik galdutako diru-sarreraren netoa. Alegia, zerga ordaintzen duten kontsumitzaileentzako gastu ahalmen gutxiago, zerga mozte berriek konpentsatuz, diru-sarrera neutro eginez16
(i) Eszenatoki honetan (best case) amerikarrek gehiago lan egiten dute eta gutxiago lortu kontsumitzaile zergak gora joanez17
(j) Beste eszenatokietan, beste ondorio batzuk gerta daitezke…18
More later…
(Gehiago beranduago…)
Maisuak bere onean! The Boss at his best!
1 Ingelesez: “So they used to tell the story about a guy who claimed he could make cars out of wood, and he started a company in Oregon that brought trees into one door of his giant building with new cars coming out of another door, and he wouldn’t let anyone inside to see how it was done. He was given a award for innovation and widely acclaimed, until one day someone got inside and saw he was shipping the trees out the back to Japan and bringing in new Korean cars. He was then arrested and jailed, etc. etc.”
2 Ingelesez: “Point is, for the macro economy it didn’t make any difference what was going on behind those closed doors, and that for purposes of understanding one can think of foreign trade as a company that takes in all that you export are and delivers back whatever is imported.”
3 Ingelesez: “This model also promotes the understanding of how, in real terms, exports are the costs of imports, and optimizing real terms of trade is about getting the most cars for the fewest trees, which is likewise what productivity is all about for the domestic economy. “
4 Ingelesez: “What about the jobs lost due to increased productivity? Well, history shows it used to take 99% of the workforce to grow the food we need to eat to live, and today in the US it takes maybe 1% of the workforce to grow enough food to eat with a lot left over to export.”
5 Ingelesez: “Yet unemployment isn’t necessarily any higher today than it was back then. Why? Because there’s always a lot more we think needs to get done than their are people to do it, and unemployment comes from a lack of funding, and not a lack of things to day.”
6 Ingelesez: “Today the service sector dominates, and more so every day, with no lack of services we’d like to have done as far as the eye can see. And unemployment, as currently defined, is necessarily the evidence that for a given level of govt. expenditure the economy is that much over taxed, as a simple point of logic. Not that policy makers understand that, of course…”
7 Ingelesez: “Now let’s add a border tax to the model, for the purpose of creating jobs, not withstanding how that premise is categorically ridiculous, as per the prior discussion. But, to quote Don Rumsfeld, ‘We’ve got to fight with the army we’ve got.’”
8 Ingelesez:”Anyway, a border tax would put a tax on importing the cars to attempt to keep us from buying them so we would have more jobs building cars domestically, and reduce the tax on exporting the trees so we would have more jobs cutting down and shipping out trees.”
9 Ingelesez: “First, we would be shipping out more trees and getting fewer cars. This makes the nation as a whole worse of due to those reduced real terms of trade.”
10 Ingelesez. “The next step is to identify the winners and losers, recognizing the losses to our standard of living are higher than the gains. Best case we put more people to work growing more trees so we have just as many trees for ourselves, and we’d put more people to work building cars so we’d have just is many cars as before. So what we accomplished is that we are working more to be left with the same amount for ourselves.”
11 Ingelesez: “That’s called a drop in productivity, and a decline in our standard of living, as work is an input and a real cost of production.”
12 Ingelesez: “Work itself is not an economic benefit. The economic benefits of work is the output produced. And the whole point of producing output is consumption of some type, either for immediate use or for future use. That is, makes no economic sense to work and produce output for the purpose of immediately throwing it away.“
13 Ingelesez: “So with the above ‘best case’ assumptions, the border tax does work to create jobs, and unemployment is a political problem, which is why the border tax has that element of political appeal.”
14 Ingelesez: “Not that it matters, but my first choice for job creation would be a fiscal adjustment, either a tax cut or spending increase, large enough to promote sufficient spending to increase sales, output, and employment to produce that additional output.“
15 Ingelesez: “That way we have that much more domestic output to consume plus all the imported cars we were buying before the border tax, and we don’t have to give away the extra trees due to the border tax proposal.”
16 Ingelesez: “First, the government expects extra revenue from the tax on the imported cars, net of the revenue lost from tax benefits for exporters. This means less spending power for consumers paying the tax, presumably offset by new tax cuts, making it all revenue neutral, which through some presumed channels is theorized to have its own positive consequences.”
17 Ingelesez: “So in this ‘best case’ scenario Americans work more and get less, while consumer taxes go up while other taxes go down. Hardly seems worth a second look?”
18 Ingelesez: “But that is only the economic best case scenario. All kinds of other things can happen, with the same model used for purposes of analysis.”
joseba says:
Mosler-en modelo erraz eta erabat adierazgarria ikusita, Trumponomics delakoaz DMT-ko beste autoreen lanak aipatu besterik ez ditut egingo.
Norbaitek nahi baditu irakurri, hemen daude:
Randall Wray:
Trumponomics: causes and prospects
Pavlina Tcherneva:
Trump’s bait and switch: job creation in the midst of welfare state sabotage
Stephanie Kelton:
Can ‘Trumponomics’ extend the recovery?
joseba says:
Nork: Warren Mosler
Bidaltze-data: asteazkena, 2017(e)ko martxoaren 29a 22:52
Nori: josebafelix
Gaia: Re: The Boss at his best!
thanks!!!
On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 10:29 AM, josebafelix wrote:
Hi Warren,
Warren Mosler: Trumponomics
Wonderful, just wonderful!
Best.
joseba
—
Warren Mosler
Valance Company, Inc.
5000 Southgate
Christiansted, USVI 00820
340 718 7710 office
Donate to the Pan Mass Challenge-
100% of all donations go directly to fund Dana Farber cancer research!
http://www2.pmc.org/profile/WM0015
http://www.moslereconomics.com
http://twitter.com/wbmosler
Because we fear becoming the next Greece, we continue to turn ourselves into the next Japan
‘The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds’
http://www.moslereconomics.com/2009/12/10/7-deadly-innocent-frauds/
“The Conservative belief that there is some law of nature which prevents men from being employed, that it is ‘rash’ to employ men, and that it is financially ‘sound’ to maintain a tenth of the population in idleness for an indefinite period, is crazily improbable – the sort of thing which no man could believe who had not had his head fuddled with nonsense for years and years. The objections which are raised are mostly not the objections of experience or of practical men. They are based on highly abstract theories – venerable, academic inventions, half misunderstood by those who are applying them today, and based on assumptions which are contrary to the facts… Our main task, therefore, will be to confirm the reader’s instinct that what seems sensible is sensible, and what seems nonsense is nonsense.” – J.M. Keynes in a pamphlet to support Lloyd George in the 1929 election.
joseba says:
Neil Wilson said… (in https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=2761684730989137546&postID=4877146312475119732&bpli=1)
“Does anyone here really accept the idea that it doesn’t matter if we sell trees or build cars?”
Do you accept that everywhere within a country has to build cars. If you don’t then you are being inconsistent with your beliefs.
The issue is why does it matter between countries but not within a country. What is so special about the physical borders that changes everything?
The answer is that there is no difference at all. Entities within a country oversave in precisely the same way as those overseas.
joseba says:
Donald Trump slams ‘archaic’ US constitution that is ‘really bad’ for the country
Republican claims the checks and balances on power woven into the US system is to blame for his problems
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-us-constitution-archaic-really-bad-fox-news-100-days-trump-popularity-ratings-barack-a7710781.html
Donald Trump has blamed the US constitution for the problems he has encountered during his first 100 days in office.
In an interview with Fox News to mark the milestone, the Republican called the system of checks and balances on power “archaic”.
“It’s a very rough system,” he said. “It’s an archaic system … It’s really a bad thing for the country.”
It comes after a torrid few months in which Mr Trump has faced a series of setbacks and embarrassments.
His introduction of a travel ban on immigration from seven mainly Muslim countries was struck down by the courts, forcing him to put forward an amended version.
Weeks later, his healthcare bill was withdrawn after it failed to secure sufficient backing from Republican senators.
Those mishaps contributed to a sense of chaos that has seen Mr Trump’s popularity fall to unprecedented lows for a US president at this stage of their term. Mr Trump’s current ratings hover around 40 per cent; at the same point in his presidency, Barack Obama was on nearly 65 per cent.
Speaking to Fox, Mr Trump admitted he was “disappointed” with Republican senators, despite claiming to have “great relationships” with many of them.
The US President also urged Americans to celebrate 1 May as “Loyalty Day” – a recognition of what he said were the US values of loyalty to “individual liberties, to limited government, and to the inherent dignity of every human being”.
The tradition dates from the Cold War, when the celebration was established as a way to stop traditional May Day celebrations being used by left-wing organisations.
Despite the setbacks, Mr Trump insisted he had kept his promises to the American people during his first 100 days in office.
“One hundred days ago, I took the oath of office and made a pledge: We are not merely going to transfer political power from one party to another, but instead are going to transfer that power from Washington, DC, and give it back to the people,” he wrote in an article for the Washington Post.
“Issue by issue, department by department, we are giving the people their country back. After decades of a shrinking middle class, open borders and the mass offshoring of American jobs and wealth, this government is working for the citizens of our country and no one else.
“In the past 100 days, I have kept that promise — and more.”