DEBUNKING LIES FROM R MURPHY

DEBUNKING LIES FROM R MURPHY

You have to be careful when you attack socialists

Hugo Adan  Jan 9 2019

My notes on

The "Green New Deal" Debunked (Part 1 of 2)

https://mises.org/wire/green-new-deal-debunked-part-1-2

01/08/2019  By Robert P. Murphy

His thesis:  “Green New Deal” makes no sense on economic grounds, either in spirit or in letter.

1-       

      [[ Murphy no even can interpret right what he writes.  In “The New Deal Actually Hurt the U.S. Economy and Prolonged the Great Depression”  .  He said:  “with official unemployment at 3.7% and price inflation rising above the Fed’s target—it makes no sense to launch another New Deal.”]]

 

[[ If we take a look to the table he provide, we notice that since the arrival of FDR to power (1933-1945) the US unemployment rate increased . FDR inherited  24.9% unemployment rate in 1933 from the Rep Hoover and his NEW DEALS make it lower up to 9.9% in 1941. So, “bobi” Murphy lied when he said that 3.7% was the rate that FDR received (this rate correspond to the crisis of 1923-1929 that the Rep Hoover couldn’t cope with (that is why he lost the re-election). It was FDR’s New Deals who solved the problem (that is why he was reelected  2 times, 3 if we count 1945 when FDR was forced  to resign). Then, FDR New Deals made perfect sense, to confront a recession similar to the one we are starting now. What doesn’t  make sense is the stupid manipulation of data from R Murphy  ]]

2-      [[ Current recession –now in process- is at stake in Ocasio Cortez  “Green New Deal”. According to Naomi Klein the issue ‘fossil fuel emissions in 12 years’ is not possible with singular policies like carbon taxes. Rather, what is needed is “rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society.” Naomi Klein adds  ” By giving the committee a mandate that connects the dots between energy, transportation, housing and construction, as well as health care, living wages, a jobs guarantee, and the urgent imperative to battle racial and gender injustice, the Green New Deal plan would be mapping precisely that kind of far-reaching change.”  So, connecting all the dots whit this wholistic-view named “Green New Deal  is the main target of Ocasio Cortez.  ]] 

[[ In Fact, it is too much to request  from a “bobi” like Murphy..  the basic principles of dialectics :  the interconection  of social and natural phenomena  & its internal contradictions. That is something that do not have space in his narrow mind.

In “An Inconvenient Omission”  ‘Bobi’ se pregunta:

a-      “Green New Deal” really isn’t merely a technical solution to the problem of ‘negative externalities’: The word “nuclear” doesn’t appear once in the entire draft legislation for the Select Committee.” 

[[ The FACT is that WW3 & nuclear issue are negative externalities resulting from negative politician in power who expend in WMD and promoting war outside..  They do so, hand on hand with big corp & international terrorist org like NATO & the Saudis jihadists. Those are issues not “external”  to our national life.. those issues belong to Geo-politics that Ocacio Cortez –Naomi Klein  address it with domestic battles like racial and gender injustices (deeply rooted in Trump Administration) ]]

b-      “Isn’t it odd that Ocasio-Cortez and Naomi Klein think we have 12 years to act, in order to save humanity from climate catastrophe, yet they have the time to talk about fixing gender imbalances while they don’t talk about a dispatchable, scalable energy source that is carbon-emission-free?”

 [[ In FACT  they do not ignore those issues.. Naomi wrote a lot on them and Ocasio Cortez -an action lady- mentioned them several times. So, big dishonesty in R Murphy ]]

c- In his “Conclusion”

A “Green New Deal” makes no sense on economic grounds, either in spirit or in letter. Even if one endorsed a Keynesian economic framework in which the historical New Deal “worked,” it still would be nonsensical to implement such a program today, with very high (peacetime) debt loads? and an economy at officially full employment?.”

[[ The FACT is that we are still using  Keynesian economics in the US and world-wide west countries, plus JA. I guess this “bobi” economist don’t  even know the basics on Keynes.  Since he assumes to be a Mises Institute thinker I will remain him that for Keynes Spending Drives Economic Growth while the Austrian or Mises‘ economics is savings and Investment in Production (not WS speculators) that drive Econ growth. For Keynes the 4 main variables  in Spending  are: a-Consumer Spending;  b-Gov Expending, c-Business Investment & d-Trade-positive-balance (more export than imports). Those are the factors & components of GDP.  To some members of Mises Institute the a factor is intentionally not well measured (it is false that we have full employment); the b-factor serve only the interest of big bankers & investors in the Milit-Indust Complex; the c-factor the rate of production capitalization is almost zero, the speculators y depend on QEs and bail-outs; the d-factor is the cancer of the creature called neoliberal expansion (we are jeopardizing life of American & the whole Universe. These are the results of Keynesian Economics.  In short: the ‘bobi’ argument that the Keynesian economic framework promoted historical New Deal  that ‘worked’..  IS FALSE  ]]

----

----