🤖
yEAH. Yannic seems pretty reasonable here. But also, what do compsci nerds mean by AGI"? They mean behaviour. They think they want sentience too. This is the mistake. The deep prejudices of physical materialism ("we are just meat machines velours.) . You cannot get general intelligence without conscious sentience. Computer science (and physics for that matter) have no idea about the human soul, nor even if we are nonphysical or not, it is not even a scientific question. This makes all the hype just a grift. The NerdReich.
The proper use case is to aid human functioning. This is not an unemployment story, but not in they way the techfascists think. See https://smithwillsuffice.github.io/ohanga-pai/questions/001_basic_ohangapai/ for a decent analysis of the economic impact. Democratize the Internet. It is a public good and needs public ownership, not the for-profit motive. The scientific curiosity motive is always sufficient to drive progress and innovation. I should know. A good scientist will work for peanuts and turn down lucrative Want job offers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkAH7-u7t5k
@SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
It still strikes me about advocates for MMT some are overly optimistic that an embracing MMT will somehow make people who want to consolidate economic power in their own hands turn left (IE pro egalitarian).
This is despite the reality that every republican administration in the United States has expanded the deficit at least starting with Ronald Reagan. These guys love deficit spending just not for normal people.
@GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai
So true.
Though, there is a Horseshoe effect. It is pretty dim, but it is discernable.
@SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
I kind of throw it under the enlightenment fetish. If people agree on some factual data point that they’ll necessarily derive a specific moral judgment about it.
But yeah, horseshoe facts are easy to understand if you appreciate the original meaning of left and right. If you define the left is egalitarianism and the right as hierarchy. Then there is no horseshoe effect. There’s just people labeling themselves for marketing purposes.
@SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
I am still never satisfied to read fiat money is given value because it is taxed. Yeah sure it’s an element of it, but in the larger context of being the legal means to settle all debts, public and private. I am currently reading temples of enterprise and it’s hard to look at what Michael Hudson is saying as money being an IOU. It was a medium to legally settle debt.
Sure, bank notes have a history as a laundry ticket to get back your clothes, but that isn’t all of it
@SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
I am reading through your GitHub publication by the way..
So I’d like to run this by you because I recently heard that up to 97% of the money supply is commercially created money (outstanding loan principals). That number seems to be incredibly high to me, but it was stated in the Forbes magazine article, on how banks create money.
Even so, the number I normally heard is that private credit is twice as large as the negative balance of the national government.
@SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
The commercial money is transitory, but it’s general mass if I want to borrow a term from physics, suggest to me that there’s a lot of money supply that can only continue to exist for a combination of two reasons deficit spending and growth in the size outstanding loans.
This only slightly alters the dynamics, but there should be I think an entry for private money creation
@GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
The M2 money as a fraction of public debt is 0.6, so it's nowhere near 90+% commercial money.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1LeLA
@dlakelan@mastodon.sdf.org @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
Yeah, I said something poorly, but the idea from Forbes was to say that commercially generated money (bank loans) with something like 97% of all the existing money.. now mind you they didn’t specify money precisely.. (M whateva)
@GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
Right, but that can't even be close to true, M2 is only 60% of public debt. So that means probably there's a bunch of overseas dollars because it doesn't even exceed the public debt. for 90% of money to be commercially created, the M2/debt would have to be something like 9 or 10 not 0.6
@dlakelan@mastodon.sdf.org @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
Yeah, like I said, I my eyes sort of likes twitch when I saw that number and I said is this right?.. but your own points bring up an interesting question. Banks do create the principal amount and stuff it into the economy. The total outstanding amount is a function of the total outstanding principle left percolating in economy, or it should be.
.. so the other part would probably be purchased treasuries?
@GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
I just suspect the Forbes article is repeating something they heard from an economist who didn't have a clue? how could 9 out of 10 dollars come from banks and 1 out of 10 come from deficit spending, yet all money put together is 0.6 of public debt?
@dlakelan@mastodon.sdf.org @GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai @SmithWillSuffice@climatejustice.social
SmithWillSuffice
