Coordination is clearly a problem for a global reflation. But if Capital is sufficiently powerful, purposeful, and supra-national, it ought to be able to override mere national interests for the sake of its own survival.
>
> Max:
> "There is clearly a narrow interest in
> deflationism, by and large, but it is not
> obvious to me why such an interest must
> assert itself in the face of increasingly
> obvious threats to social stability."
Both you and Louis misunderstood me here. I was not expressing a positive view of deflationism, but trying to say that those who benefit from deflation (chiefly bondholders) would be prime suspects as obstacles to a global reflation. I then said that this material interest did not seem sufficient to thwart policies aimed at securing capitalism against such dire threats as a global financial meltdown and/or a new Great Depression.
>
> Doyle
> Isn't Greenspans policies, and IMF policies deflationary? Then what
> makes this narrow?
Compared to the survival of capitalism, it is narrow. It is also narrow in that not a few capitalists have no interest in deflation--chiefly manufacturers. It is narrowest of all, of course, in comparison to the public interest in mildly inflationary, high employment.
> Wouldn't Greenspan injecting liquidity mean panic?
Just the opposite, I would think. Panic is what we're getting into now, while the Fed sits with its thumb up its ass.
> How about the 60 trillion dollars in derivatives which would be involved
> in a system wide melt down? The press has been saying it will take
> months to know the scale of losses based upon derivative trades?
I can't speak to that.
>
> Max:
> "I would think that any Marxist
> doctrine of inevitability would offer more
> compelling factors which would certainly
> foster ideological rationales but more
> important, convey some bundle of economic
> and/or financial imperatives to the guys
> in charge."
>
> Doyle
> The usual term for Marxist who believe in the inevitability of
> predicting something economically is "Vulgar Marxist".
Well there seems to be great confidence on the part of some here of the inevitability of a big collapse. It's not vulgar if you can make a good case for it. I've been saying I see the threads of an argument, but no rope thick enough to hang onto.
>
> Also I didn't know you carried a gun, and was a quick shot.
That's not a gun. I'm just happy to see you.
I enjoyed your short fiction immensely.
MBS