Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

$100 million to the first deficit hawk or dove to prove Warren Mosler wrong

Putting his money where his mouth is:

Warren Mosler, Connecticut’s Independent candidate for U.S. Senate today announced that it is an indisputable fact that U.S. Government spending is not operationally constrained by revenue and will give $100 million of his own money to pay down the Federal deficit if any Congressman or Senator can prove him wrong. “I am running for U.S. Senate to see my policies implemented to create the 20 million jobs we need. And to do this it must be understood that there is simply no such thing as the U.S. Federal government running out of money, nor is the Federal government operationally dependent on borrowing from China or anyone else. U.S. states, individuals, and companies can indeed become insolvent, but U.S. government checks will never bounce,” states Mosler. “Yes, large Federal deficits that push the economy beyond the point of full employment can lead to inflation or currency devaluation, but not bankruptcy and not bounced checks. If lawmakers today understood this fact, they would not be looking to cut Social Security and we would not still be mired in this disastrous recession.”

Well done.

Any D or R want to step on to the plate this? $100 million isn't chump change, and Mosler's got it. And really... If Mosler's wrong, it should be a no-brainer to prove him wrong, right?

0
No votes yet

Comments

letsgetitdone's picture
Submitted by letsgetitdone on

Previously, he offered one million to anyone who could prove him wrong. Now he's offered 100 times that. Will anyone take it up, or will we continue to hear the shrill call of domestic chickens in reply.

Actually this is pretty significant because he's offering the 100 million not just to Obama and David Walker and Alan Simpson, but also ti the likes of Joe Stieglitz, and Paul K. Krugman, and Dean Baker.

Submitted by ohio on

There's plenty of room in the press release you link to to ensure the safety of his checkbook. He's challenging people to prove his theory wrong, which is ridiculous, and the qualifiers ("operationally") are just extra checkbook-saving-frosting.

If he really wanted to put his money where his mouth is, he'd make infomercials and buy time on television to explain his positions. Or finance a show, call it "Real Money," that challenges all of the financial myths coming out of the industry and government. $100 million would go very, very far in getting this message out.

This is a publicity stunt and not a very good one.