Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 12-08-2007, 08:34 PM

i still dont understand the linkage between the mortage crisis and the international currency system in general--as i keep saying, i see an analogy, but that's it.

and i REALLY don't see the linkage that follows from this, between the mortgage bubble and fiat currency, particularly if you take ron paul's little dance with alan greenspan out of the equation.

the transaction tax on currecy market activity would tax transnational activity. the premise is that A cause [[ok, 2 CAUSES---grammar--sheesh]] of political/economic instability in the current context are: (a) the lack of regulation and (b) the scale and velocity of this activity.

the premise would be that BOTH follow from neoliberal assumptions about relatively open markets, how they behave, what they do, etc.. the tobin tax proposal is just a device to slow down the system and to use that money to counter some of the effects of these markets by funnelling it into development programs.

it isn't a structural critique--its a proposal to adjust the system in the direction of longer-term stability.

the main reason i brought it up is that it seems plausible at the level of premise and this premise--that the explanation for speculation-driven crises in the present context is the ideology that directly enables them--opens onto potential actions that address the actual problems.

it seems to me that is what is at issue in the analysis of these problems--moving gradually outward from the immediate context to find larger-scale problems/issue that are proximate enough to enable rational action.

i dont see ANY rational action following from ron paul's claim that the problem really is that because there is fiat currency markets aren't free enough.
and the consequences of thinking through what such a position would entail practically seem ridiculous---tying currency back to the gold standard as if that is not simply pegging one form of fiat to another seems to me to be dreaming. and if these "imperfect" free markets are already free enough to generate massive instability and very significant social consequences, why on earth would you want to get sucked into a position that pushes you to argue that they ought to be even more open?

but maybe i'm just not seeing something.
well, except that ron paul is a whackjob. that i see. but i didn't need this particular entry point to figure that out.
so i'm confused.
please help.

but i am wondering if this is something that should be split out from this thread--if the linkage between the subprime issue and international currency in itself comes undone, we should move the discussion.

12-08-2007, 08:34 PM	#55 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i still dont understand the linkage between the mortage crisis and the international currency system in general--as i keep saying, i see an analogy, but that's it. and i REALLY don't see the linkage that follows from this, between the mortgage bubble and fiat currency, particularly if you take ron paul's little dance with alan greenspan out of the equation. the transaction tax on currecy market activity would tax transnational activity. the premise is that A cause [[ok, 2 CAUSES---grammar--sheesh]] of political/economic instability in the current context are: (a) the lack of regulation and (b) the scale and velocity of this activity. the premise would be that BOTH follow from neoliberal assumptions about relatively open markets, how they behave, what they do, etc.. the tobin tax proposal is just a device to slow down the system and to use that money to counter some of the effects of these markets by funnelling it into development programs. it isn't a structural critique--its a proposal to adjust the system in the direction of longer-term stability. the main reason i brought it up is that it seems plausible at the level of premise and this premise--that the explanation for speculation-driven crises in the present context is the ideology that directly enables them--opens onto potential actions that address the actual problems. it seems to me that is what is at issue in the analysis of these problems--moving gradually outward from the immediate context to find larger-scale problems/issue that are proximate enough to enable rational action. i dont see ANY rational action following from ron paul's claim that the problem really is that because there is fiat currency markets aren't free enough. and the consequences of thinking through what such a position would entail practically seem ridiculous---tying currency back to the gold standard as if that is not simply pegging one form of fiat to another seems to me to be dreaming. and if these "imperfect" free markets are already free enough to generate massive instability and very significant social consequences, why on earth would you want to get sucked into a position that pushes you to argue that they ought to be even more open? but maybe i'm just not seeing something. well, except that ron paul is a whackjob. that i see. but i didn't need this particular entry point to figure that out. so i'm confused. please help. but i am wondering if this is something that should be split out from this thread--if the linkage between the subprime issue and international currency in itself comes undone, we should move the discussion. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 12-08-2007 at 08:37 PM..