"Modern Monetary Policy" is basically a way to transfer money from the middle/working class to the poor and the rich. It's a way to squeeze out the middle. Wage growth will always lag behind inflation (by definition), and often differ significantly across different regions of the country. So when more money is printed, people living paycheck to paycheck lose out (unless they have some way to get at that printed money).
Meanwhile, the big winners are the very rich who have property/assets that can move with inflation (stocks, real estate, art...). The other winners are the bureaucrats, top contractors, and other corrupt officials who can get a piece of the printed money. And then the welfare recipients get a piece of it, but they have no incentive to get off welfare and switch to the workforce.
Another waste of FP space. This guy is obviously a wolf in sheep’s clothing who doesn’t even hesitate to declare so outright.
Could we please get a profile on someone who is really battling these policies that have destroyed the state where I was born and raised and which will soon drag America completely under the mud?
This article is too shallow. While I know why I'm against DEI, etc, I don't know why Simchowitz is and what he would do about it. Regardless, he lost me at forgiving student loan debt and his reason behind it. Biden's plan absolves the debt of those with 6 figure salaries that, if I'd been earning that much, could have paid off my debt in a year. Now that I finally got out of debt I have to pay the debt of others, including those with salaries twice what mine was. No thanks. I'll pass.
He’s also an ardent proponent of modern monetary theory, which holds that the government should be able to print and spend endless money to alleviate unemployment and boost the economy.
I'm no economist, but I'm quite sure this is a terrible idea. This idea shows a basic lack of understanding of what one learns in Econ 101.
The hypocrisy of the left IS unfathomable. Sanctuary cities is one example. But I've always pointed out the (ab)use by Universities of "Adjuncts". They often work several gigs and get paid poorly and no benefits. But the people who inhabit these institutions will lecture the rest of us about a "living wage" and then not pay such.
Eliminating unemployment. Is he kidding? Is he going to make employment mandatory? Look at the economy of the Soviet Union with 100% employment, which caused low productivity, no entrepreneurship, loss of talent due to lack of competition. We can go on forever. Workers received equal salary regardless of how productive or creative they were: good engineers and those who made engineering mistakes; talented teachers and those who lacked education themselves; dedicated doctors who saved lives and those who may have caused harm - all got paid the same miserable pennies. You can’t pay more when everyone is employed. Equality in action. This was the cause of brain drain from socialist countries.
Add to it that «parasitism” was punishable by law (dissidents who lost jobs because of political convictions were persecuted and sentenced under it) and that there was no welfare system to support those unable to work.
The guy is ignorant of history and economics and has such a mishmash in his head. There is so much more we could say about employing everyone in this country. He is delirious.
A “centralized, entrepreneurial government” is a non-sequitur and a fantasy. He doesn’t mention the core problem for Democrats: they have doubled down on their ideology of envy, and widespread envy is never going to be good for Jews, a population that ought to be valued for their academic, economic, and professional contributions to American life.
Stefan Simchowitz has a schizophrenic political philosophy to say the least. Only a fantasy thinker could believe that a centralized (and authoritarian) government can solve the legitimate problems we face.
He hasn't been mugged by reality. Instead, he's been able to create his own fantasy version of 'reality.' Then again, if we compare him to Adam Schiff, he looks pretty good.
"What is a conservative? A liberal who has been mugged."
I don't know the origin of that quote but it was a staple of talk radio in the 1970s. I would say that Simchowitz woke up and smelled the roses but as the article reveals, he smelled something entirely different. He's not a true conservative; he doesn't have the stomach to do the job; just another poser.
"Modern Monetary Policy" is basically a way to transfer money from the middle/working class to the poor and the rich. It's a way to squeeze out the middle. Wage growth will always lag behind inflation (by definition), and often differ significantly across different regions of the country. So when more money is printed, people living paycheck to paycheck lose out (unless they have some way to get at that printed money).
Meanwhile, the big winners are the very rich who have property/assets that can move with inflation (stocks, real estate, art...). The other winners are the bureaucrats, top contractors, and other corrupt officials who can get a piece of the printed money. And then the welfare recipients get a piece of it, but they have no incentive to get off welfare and switch to the workforce.
Another waste of FP space. This guy is obviously a wolf in sheep’s clothing who doesn’t even hesitate to declare so outright.
Could we please get a profile on someone who is really battling these policies that have destroyed the state where I was born and raised and which will soon drag America completely under the mud?
This article is too shallow. While I know why I'm against DEI, etc, I don't know why Simchowitz is and what he would do about it. Regardless, he lost me at forgiving student loan debt and his reason behind it. Biden's plan absolves the debt of those with 6 figure salaries that, if I'd been earning that much, could have paid off my debt in a year. Now that I finally got out of debt I have to pay the debt of others, including those with salaries twice what mine was. No thanks. I'll pass.
He’s also an ardent proponent of modern monetary theory, which holds that the government should be able to print and spend endless money to alleviate unemployment and boost the economy.
I'm no economist, but I'm quite sure this is a terrible idea. This idea shows a basic lack of understanding of what one learns in Econ 101.
The hypocrisy of the left IS unfathomable. Sanctuary cities is one example. But I've always pointed out the (ab)use by Universities of "Adjuncts". They often work several gigs and get paid poorly and no benefits. But the people who inhabit these institutions will lecture the rest of us about a "living wage" and then not pay such.
Simchowitz is a Democrat plant to water down the Garvey vote, in hopes that two disgustingly self-serving Dems will make the top two for November.
What a character. No thanks to having this guy in the Senate, but it’s an interesting take on the type of people who are changing the way they vote.
I read the whole article and I see the hypocrisy of Stefan Simchowitz.
Eliminating unemployment. Is he kidding? Is he going to make employment mandatory? Look at the economy of the Soviet Union with 100% employment, which caused low productivity, no entrepreneurship, loss of talent due to lack of competition. We can go on forever. Workers received equal salary regardless of how productive or creative they were: good engineers and those who made engineering mistakes; talented teachers and those who lacked education themselves; dedicated doctors who saved lives and those who may have caused harm - all got paid the same miserable pennies. You can’t pay more when everyone is employed. Equality in action. This was the cause of brain drain from socialist countries.
Add to it that «parasitism” was punishable by law (dissidents who lost jobs because of political convictions were persecuted and sentenced under it) and that there was no welfare system to support those unable to work.
The guy is ignorant of history and economics and has such a mishmash in his head. There is so much more we could say about employing everyone in this country. He is delirious.
Can’t say I would trust anyone who admits they are a progressive even if they have been “mugged by reality”. The Trojan Horse comes to mind.
A “centralized, entrepreneurial government” is a non-sequitur and a fantasy. He doesn’t mention the core problem for Democrats: they have doubled down on their ideology of envy, and widespread envy is never going to be good for Jews, a population that ought to be valued for their academic, economic, and professional contributions to American life.
Stefan Simchowitz has a schizophrenic political philosophy to say the least. Only a fantasy thinker could believe that a centralized (and authoritarian) government can solve the legitimate problems we face.
He hasn't been mugged by reality. Instead, he's been able to create his own fantasy version of 'reality.' Then again, if we compare him to Adam Schiff, he looks pretty good.
"What is a conservative? A liberal who has been mugged."
I don't know the origin of that quote but it was a staple of talk radio in the 1970s. I would say that Simchowitz woke up and smelled the roses but as the article reveals, he smelled something entirely different. He's not a true conservative; he doesn't have the stomach to do the job; just another poser.
I'll pass, thank you.
I do appreciate a good hat
This guy is dangerous.