Some readers here did, I know, take part in a Green Party event yesterday evening, as did I, although I should add that I am not a member.
The event as open to all comers and will be posted on YouTube and as a such I feel free to mention what was said.
Several people present, including Larry Sanders and me, asked about my concerns on the Green's policy on money creation.
Molly Scott Cato graciously addressed this question and acknowledged that she and I have been in touch about it. We have agreed to discuss how this policy might be reformed whilst reflecting the Greens distaste for an economy based on debt and the charging of excessive interest rates. I think there are good ways around that to create a genuine compromise that might work. It will be an ongoing project for a while in which I am happy to help. I gather from what Molly said that it might go to Green Party conference next spring.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
As a member, I am glad to hear they’re listening. I hope they take your advice. Thanks for the work you do.
Well, you can’t say fairer than that can you – good luck is all I can and I hope that the penny drops soon.
I am very glad to read this Richard: I had contacted the office of Caroline Lucas after reading your article regarding the Green Party’s economic policy and look forward to what results you and MSC arrive at.
As a former member and very active supporternof the Green Party, I am very glad you are doing this. I hope a pragmatic way forward can be found.
Excellent work. Ultimately this will make the Green Party a more powerful party than Labour since this party is ignorantly wedded to the Thatcherite nonsensical dogma “government has no money of its own”! Let’s hope the Green Party leadership build up a good relationship with you so that you can help advise how to present the importance of government spending and how it can do so relative to real resources.
Thank you Richard.
Get a model policy right first and then focus on the wording.
The tories are very open that they are absolutely ruthless in defending their wealth and they are well practiced in using every trick in the book to destroy anyone, or anything that gets in their way.
I know you have had bitter experience in promoting ideas that question the consensus.
Thank you again.
This is good news.
I’m not in the UK, but would like to see the Green Party there get into much more detailed work on the realities of transition to degrowth – not only with accountants but also with lawyers on the necessary revisions to company and commercial law (which incidentally also involved the accountancy profession because standards there will also have to change to include ‘social auditing’, etc.). Broad-brush economists, however ‘green’, will only take us so far…
I think it would be a game changer for some thinking of switching support to the Green Party, if it were to adopt a sensible policy on the economy.
Let’s see…
One of MS-C’s important points, I thought, was the necessity of finding a way to really open people’s eyes to the good sense of the views expressed on this site, given how utterly convinced so many people are of the “household budget” model. And why would they not be? The model lies within their experience, makes sense and has been accepted and promoted by governments and the media ever since Thatcher announced that the government has no money except what it collects in taxes. On the whole, people don’t even see that it’s an issue. Her plan to try and get it on the conference agenda (October, I think, Richard) in the hope of getting the membership on board, since they are the ones who decide policy, is optimistic, but you never know. And since the Labour Party has now abandoned hope, we have to grasp every possibility.
I’d not seen MS-C speak before, but was really impressed with how knowledgeable and thoughtful she was and especially how she listened to and tried to answer the questions that were actually being asked rather than just saying what she wanted to say.
I was at a meeting in Oxford a few years ago in which one of the speakers was Cato and the other was Steven Hail. So she certainly should know about fiat money.
I’ll try my best to persuade those who who have left the labour party and think that not voting is better than voting for the green party.
After all, they can’t vote for this lot.
https://labourhub.org.uk/2023/07/26/labours-npf-showed-the-fiscal-and-political-immobilisation-of-starmers-labour/
Here’s one explanation why the Labour Party has immobilised itself under a mountain of unnecessary market fundamentalist concrete a poor economic adviser named Jonathan Portes:-
https://new-wayland.com/blog/mmt-verify-how-we-can-staff-the-nhs-without-tax-rises/
Note in particular it’s alright by Jonathan Portes that people should leave the public sector for higher paying jobs in the private sector that is not considered inflationary but the reverse is! The Portes’s logic here is resting on the concept taxes pay for public spending.
I also have to say that counter argument is not well put
I agree Neil Wilson doesn’t explain the processes as well as he could but if the Green Party is to take up MMT it will need to do just that.
First they need to understand the enemy’s arguments. Jonathan Portes as an ex-Treasury mandarin and Paul Tucker of the Bank of England were the goto authorities on the following document which is really just a piece of market fundamentalist dogma:-
https://www.dmo.gov.uk/media/ofgpmxsr/report95.pdf
Here’s Yeva Nersisyan and Randall Wray describing the processes necessary to implement a Green New Deal:-
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3398983
And here’s Warren Mosler explaining how to maintain price stability over the short and long run:-
https://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Full-Employment-AND-Price-Stability.pdf
I was unable to participate in the event. I agree that excessive private debt is a bad thing as are high interest rates but I am not sure what an economy not based on debt would be like.
As yet it is unimaginable and so a model that does at least allow for a transition has to be available
Here is the video of the event:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nbk0tI35Ods
Richard’s question is answered from around 49mins in.
Really glad you made it to the event Richard!
It’s clear from the video that Molly Scott Cato doesn’t understand the function of government borrowing when the state operates a sovereign currency. She’s still stuck with this paradigm:-
https://www.dmo.gov.uk/media/ofgpmxsr/report95.pdf
when she ought to be thinking in terms of the following paradigm explanations how the UK financial system really operates and how best to present this to the UK public:-
https://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Full-Employment-AND-Price-Stability.pdf
Following on from this second paradigm the following paper further expands the paradigm in terms of implementing a New Green Deal:-
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3398983
Well done, I hope it goes well.
There is a reality that the Green Party need to face up to.
1) They really have no chance of winning under FPTP.
2) Under PR, if we ever get it, if they want to be part of any progressive alliance they would need to accept some compromises. I think this is definitely one policy area which will require compromise.
Re PR, while all the media are trying to distract us with the plight of that poor chap Nigel Farage and those nasty free market banks telling him that he doesn’t have enough in millions to meet their conditions, yesterday this happened.
Campaigners for electoral reform are celebrating a landmark win, as a key body that feeds into Labour’s policy-writing process has formally recognised that Westminster’s winner-takes-all voting system is a driver of “the distrust and alienation we see in politics”.
https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/25/labour-recognises-westminsters-voting-system-is-driving-distrust-in-potential-pivotal-moment-for-proportional-representation-fight/
Let’s hope it sticks.
The Byline Times post is about Labour for a New Democracy. It’s not Starmer’s party that believes it and will do it. He wants FPTP still.
“The flaws in the current voting system are contributing to the distrust and alienation we see in politics, but there is no consensus for a new system.
“Any proposed change to our voting system must be carefully thought-through – it cannot be dictated by political leaders or forced upon the country from the top down”
That is in the final wording of the NPF. That doesn’t say that the labour party will change to PR, which is what it voted for last year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha86-w5P-Oo&t=372s
This is Prem talking about being at the PLP meeting last week. Labour not going to change their minds, no matter who tells them the truth.
It was a very welcome response from Molly. The further point she made, recognising the power the financial markets can exert in response to any attempt by a government to challenge existing orthodoxy, was also well made.
Molly has much to learn:-
https://moslereconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Full-Employment-AND-Price-Stability.pdf
…although not a member, I am pleased to learn of your contact with the Green Party. Well done & long may it continue. I confess to obsession with getting these ideas into the political domain, & in seeking some kind of unity in the opposition to the Neoliberal juggernaut that has barnstormed its way to nothing short of de facto governance – worldwide.
Anyone hear Tony Blair t’other day saying “…we can’t keep on dipping into the public pot & must make far more use of privately funded initiatives…”? PFI rearing its ugly head yet again! There again Mr B is (still?) an employee of J.P.Morgan – quelle surprise! Yuk!!!