The complaining about both sides being bad argument is an escape hatch for having to deal with their own hypocrisy.

"first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye"

Both sides are bad, awful really every sneaky underhanded anti-democratic act you can accuse a politically important member of either major party, someone of relatively equal importance in the other party has done the same and recently! You either choose to not see or you consume only highly biased partisan new sources.

If you don't have hold your nose while voting in at least national elections, you're the one with moral failings.

Not everything is about smarts though, some of it is just volume.

How many polymer formation can you model and observe properties of in the search for some new plastic material for a specific application. The AI does not have to be smarter, it just has to be faster than the human material scientists before it.

command structures ... like Antifa International.

I am starting to become convinced YOU are in fact one of these terrorists.

It is kind of a circular problem though. If you have not got the talent because the domain is new to you; how do your train up talent in the area? Who is going to do this training?

Right now 'high end' AI/ML in the commercial space is rather leading the academic space. So there probably is a very real issue finding a pool of people with 'enough background' to figure out, if you are really trying to do something that is actually avaunt guard.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.supremecourt.gov%2Fo...

There you are! anything else I can help you google?

Right after you admit Democrats have encouraged illegal mass migration on such a scale that the probability of someone being an illegal immigrant based only on their skin color and spoken language justifies the practice!

Spoken like true Brown Shirt

never seen anything of the kind, just a lot of rslivergun claiming he is being targeted with zero evidence and his sock puppet accounts spouting the same bs.

Links or it didn't happen!

"Hi Stalinst puke here"

is also shorter than what you typed!

Don't forget fighting foreign wars in places that have little direct trade consequences for your own people or worse actively compete against your agricultural and energy products...

It has nothing to do with Executive authority, it has to do with who the executive actually is.

People voted for Joe Biden, it is even possibly he really won the election, nobody voted for Jill Biden, or Jeff Zients.

I would argue that QE worked (for selected definition of worked) because we had the debt instrument system. You're point about the government bonds as a savings vehicle is very relevant to why QE did work.

Rather than spending all that money into the economy on actual things we saw corporate and financial cash balance sheets swell, and the savings rate of wealthy individuals jump. The money went to places, to offset the monetary contraction that was happening as private sector debt was written down and off onto the side lines. Basically QE expanded the money supply at a time when conditions would have otherwise seen it contracting without having much impact on the velocity of money.

If you ran pure MMT, the only real options for injecting money, would be either direct spending or tax rebates to individuals. Both are highly inflationary. Unlike the wealthy that throw it on the heap, regular people spend it, if the government buys or builds stuff that directly means those goods get chased immediately by the new dollars raising prices for everyone else.

I want to emphasis here I am not saying they current system is "fair" I am just pointing our how it works, or rather how it was working. Letting the rich get richer was also giving the government run way to stabilize the economy. To some degree the political turmoil we are experiencing now is we have let some of the rich (in all quadrants of the political map) get so rich they can now very nearly impact markets more than government can. As usually the oh so smart technocrats in charge of our FED and staffing the Treasury (looks and Janet Yellen) seem to have absolutely missed lesson of George Soros' Black Wednesday.

If the economy grows or becomes more productive with a fixed money supply - you have deflation. Fewer tokens buying more goods. There is no need for a growth in money supply for economic expansion, at least at the start only a growth in velocity.

But the faster/bigger that expansion the more deflation, eventually the deflationary pressure will get to big, and the expansion will stop because nobody will be able to locate a token to spend.

If the economy is stalling, you'd generally want to be able to do government spending, to immediately produce some velocity, but at the same time your revenues are declining.

This is why MMT is just out of step with the idea we want a smooth economy rather than boom and bust cycles. MMT does not give you spending power when things are contracting, you can reduce taxes but if people are to pessimistic to spend the money drifts to the side lines. When the economy is growing you can expand supply as needed but taxing just slows growth and leaves everyone asking 'why'. Of course you need to because otherwise you have unchecked monetary expansion which will be inflationary but you lack debt to point at and clear aim target.

Another way to look at it is with fiat dollars we are already there. But creating debt on a rainy day keeps a record of how far the pendulum was pushed on the rainy days, so you have an idea of how much growth to choke off with taxation on the good days, to maintain some long term inflationary expectations - that was how it was supposed to work. Then we broke that system when someone said "deficits don't matter". You have MMT anyway because does anyone really thing the government isn't going to default?

We have not seen a federal surplus in 25 years and even then it boils down to where you draw lines and what your accounting methods are. Nobody in either of our political parties has publishing anything remotely credible as far as a path to a balanced budget. To that end the debt is already irrelevant in the broadest context, if you want to know if MMT works you are already basically living it and have been since at least the start of the pandemic. You tell me how's it working out?

This is a bad strategy all around. If you try to manage the money supply with spending, it means that must inflate anytime your wish to boost the economy with fiscal policy.

It would prevent governments from doing stimulus when the really should. Meanwhile it would force additional government spending when the economy is expanding or becoming more productive on its own; because to do otherwise would trigger deflation and probably break things that are working.

Basically that plan pretends there are no rainy days.

I expect national bankruptcies will play out a lot more like personal ones than the economists like to think, that is they be slow at first then suddenly and all at once..