m of care – sept 23

1st fight club – the great debt debate –

Renowned academic economists Michael Hudson and Thomas Piketty meet on the first anniversary of David Graeber’s death to debate the most serious problems facing today’s finance-capital economies – and what to do about them

fight club.. david graeber.. debt (book).. thomas piketty.. hudson on debt.. m of care – may 18.. et al

[https://museum.care/room/fighting-club/]

via nika dubrovsky tweet:

What is important is a conversation. We are going to have our first Fight Club on 23-09-2021 with Michael Hudson and Thomas Piketty talking about Debt

https://t.co/1HQyDTmC5W

I think it’s important to talk about Freedom and Care in Madrid on 22-09-2021. 8/

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/nikadubrovsky/status/1439706970383130625

registered.. hope to be able to join.. but not resonating.. because i don’t think things that matter can be debated/fought.. ie: graeber model law.. graeber values law.. et al

@adistantpeople maybe more than 1000 people? we will stream it on https://t.co/iswrYLptVs and you can ask your questions in chat

Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/nikadubrovsky/status/1439712838457626631

____________

notes/quotes from debate:

nika: in the spirit of david’s rejection of academic excellence.. next one will be about nature of money.. on computer.. had file.. nightmare.. all B & academic papers.. ‘we humans are the product of our social relationship.. ‘ that’s why important to him.. fight club.. urge fighters to be emotional, provocative, bold.. if enough of us think about what debt means.. society will change.. ‘change of common sense.. and collective imagination’.. ‘transformation of common sense and how e life together’.. 10 anniv of occupy.. didn’t take over territory but it did change public discourse.. look at world differently.. michael hudson came up w many of ideas david used in book debt..

also though graeber model law (more resonating to me)

lynn parramore (moderating session): most of us united in debt.. so 2 brilliant thinkers to help us unpack this..

t: his book major contribution.. so what about debt.. in future.. there will be debt cancellation – getting debt back to zero.. there are long cycles about debt.. at some point something will have to happen.. and i think it will be like 200 yrs ago..

m: on the 1%.. i think everyone knew this.. but don’t accept until stats.. and i think you (t) helped w this.. and most important point you asked.. ‘what caused this’.. returns exceed rate of growth.. so have rich getting richer.. where we have diff approach.. how do you explain all this.. you say: abrupt turning point in 1980.. and i think the 1% look at that as a success story.. because so productive.. i think your book was praised.. because you didn’t come up with a credible solution/alt.. i think the publisher probably said.. what are your solutions.. and i think you said.. tax wealthy.. and i don’t see that as solution (gave reasons).. the fact is 1% don’t really make much income.. of taxable income.. that’s the whole problem.. so i want to go into what your book is not about.. what has created this disperity.. and why has it widened so much since 80.. interest rates reached peak and has gone down since.. reason: 99% getting too much income.. rates went down from 20% to almost zero today.. most went into real estate.. symbiosis between finance and real estate.. most of monopoly rent has come from privatization.. how did this 1% get most of this wealth.. in old fashioned way – from taking it from public domain.. aka: by privatization.. instead of public infra.. you have privatized owners financed by banks.. raising rates.. govt not even allowed to bargain w pharma co’s for growth profits.. et al.. one person’s credit is someone else’s debt.. so you describe 1% wealth in form of savings.. i see another part.. by debt of 99%.. econ forced increasingly into debt.. how to solve? taxation will not be enough.. only way to reverse is to begin wiping out the debt.. if leave 99% debt in place.. will leave 1% savings (tax exempt) in place.. i think you left out govt’s role .. fin wealth has spilled over to become th econ central planner.. planned in wall street.. managed/reason isn’t to make money.. it’s capital gains.. everything (rent et al) is for paying interest.. largest public utility of all.. money creation/banking.. is left in public hands.. in us banks create credit to flow money make new means of production.. they make loans for real estate.. for corp take overs.. they don’t make loans to make new factories.. which is what govt creation in say china would do.. as long as banks in private hands.. they will create their product.. which is debt.. more pay to fin sector.. less for goods/services.. my solution is to restore banking/credit to public hands

2nd.. you talk about taxing.. as long as banks write law codes.. and govt are employees of that.. not going to work.. source is mainly econ rent.. if had land tax.. (which is what whole 19th cent was about).. wouldn’t have increased rent being paid to 1%.. so change tax code base.. w land/natural-resource tax.. and return key infra to public domain.. so basic needs supplied at low prices.. like before 80.. compound interest will also grow faster.. only solution is to wipe out overall debts.. which is savings of 1%.. as long as you leave these savings in place.. not going to be a solution

t: i don’t see disagreement about anything you just say.. this was written 10 yrs ago.. i’m trying to make progress all the time.. i don’t pretend answers are in one book.. like i said.. the cancellation of debt is very important.. as you said.. at a broader level .. it’s all about power and political institutions.. our collective ability to change distribution of wealth thru taxation or debt cancellation is going to take major work to change this.. on chinese bank working well but nobody wants a dictatorship..

let’s try/code money (any form of measuring/accounting) as the planned obsolescence w/ubi as temp placebo.. needs met w/o money.. till people forget about measuring

oikos (the economy our souls crave).. ‘i should say: the house shelters day-dreaming, the house protects the dreamer, the house allows one to dream in peace.’ – gaston bachelard, the poetics of space

we need to org around legit needs.. ie: a nother way

m: it would not surprise me if we end up in agreement in what to do .. i would like to point out our disagreement.. *compound interest always greater.. so in the end.. debts can’t be repaid.. debt will always happen if you don’t wipe out the debts.. no way to get out of this econ polarization w/o a breakdown.. but that’s too radical.. what i was referring to w china.. ie: evergrand real estate .. a debt financed housing boom.. i think china will make opp decision and not create political suicide and go for socialism.. (reasons why this would work).. that’s how markets work.. that really is the argument.. **obviously i’m suggesting a radical step.. as you are.. if you challenge them.. that’s pretty radical

*and cancer will always be there if don’t wipe out the money/measuring/accounting.. any form of m\a\p.. we need to org around legit needs.. which beg we not org via measuring things.. not via comparing things

**but not radical enough..

we’re spending too much energy on debating/counting/stat-ing/measuring things.. we need to let go of any form of m\a\p

lynn: q: every time good ideas.. we run up against the dinosaur.. where do you see the most effective pressure points.. for getting anything accomplished

t: we need debt cancellation.. i don’t think this is too radical.. rather.. not radical enough.. also .. redistributing wealth

still not enough.. we need to let go..

t: first i think we’ve created an international legal system.. w/nothing natural in the system.. so individual countries have to get rid of them.. via taxation et al.. ie: sanders made some progress when said.. ‘blah blah on taxes’.. we need those forms.. how? .. we need to ‘blah blah on when people see more catastrophic climate/ineq.. will find it less funny seeing all these billionaires w private jets et al’

m: i don’t see a change w/in the existing system.. i guess that makes me radical

not radical enough.. if you are still in the system.. (that is killing us.. aka: any form of m\a\p)..

we need a means to undo our hierarchical listening so that we can legit get our of the system

m: t’s #1 suggestion.. tax inherited wealth.. good suggestion..

so.. blah blah debating w/in the system.. oi

m: can’t solve problems in existing system because it’s controlled already by the 1%.. t

that’s why we need a legit alt that the 1% also already crave..

gershenfeld something else law et al

start of q&a

m: on need to change vocab.. ie: land doesn’t have a value..

but your language is still embedded in the poisonous system

t: in case of energy.. have to realize some sources of energy create negative value.. so have to make some energy illegal.. if done that.. and no more neg energy.. then redistribution of wealth must be about all forms of wealth

q: on student debt and what types of resistance

m: i wish there were.. i don’t see any.. president saying not allowed to wipe out student debt because of bankruptcy.. idea is to keep people indebted so they have to go to work.. purpose of student debt is to make them dependent.. in other countries ed is free.. very little you can do w students.. i guess.. if all stopped paying .. they couldn’t throw 20 million of you in jail.. but they’d fight back.. with B ness.. no political party in favor of getting rid of student debt

both work/school killing us.. supposed to’s of school/work et al..

t: blah blah on politics.. diff things could have happened w diff president.. then blah blah on ed expanse making prosperity and we have to manage to put this back on the agenda

oi.. any form of supposed to‘s .. of people telling other people what to do.. of democratic admin.. killing us