There is a nationalized industry which enables the government to pay people. In the UK it is called the Bank of England. Whether or not it turns a profit is of no importance.

Wasn't familiar with Lipsey. I found this interesting paper: Successes and failures in the transformation of economics.
Also worth reading: The Trouble with Macroeconomics.
Now these guys are both NeoClassical economists so, despite being almost as scathing as me, they still believe there is a baby in the bathwater. Someone who doesn't is Steve Keen: Debunking Economics

I don't think your examples are as good as you think. Consider this graph for Turkiye, particularly the period between Nov 2022 and Jan 2024.

In Chile the 'reforms' were so disastrous they were abandoned after two or three years and only reintroduced slowly in the 1980s.

Poland got a big bailout from the US. Russia was denied the same and had a massive depression. My impression is that Russia (which rowed back on the reforms under Putin) is now doing better than Poland, even despite the war.

The central assumptions of NeoClassical economics (General Equilibrium, ergodicity, microfoundations for macro, neutrality of money, etc., etc.) are all wrong.

NeoClassical economics is a pseudo-scientific ideology because it pretends to be scientific but isn't and its true purpose is to justify and protect a particular political arrangement. Nothing to do with its failures, though they are legion.

China has not adopted NeoClassical economics. It controls its banks and oligarchs, has an industrial policy, capital controls, conducts extensive public works, etc. It does experiment with various ideas but is quick to shut down any that don't further the public good. NeoClassical economics denies that there is a public good.

It's true there have been no major episodes of deflation since WW2. This can be attributed to the end of the gold standard, and the ideas of John Maynard Keynes which are usually deprecated but always resorted to in extremis. I remember Bernanke et al crowing about how they had mastered macroeconomics... in 2007.

You are confusing Socialism for NeoLiberalism.

Mainstream (NeoClassical) economics is a pseudo-scientfic ideology. Its (purported) methodology is primarily deductive logic:

premises -> logic -> conclusion

That's fine, as far as it goes, provided the premises are at least approximately true. Most NeoClassical premises are not. Some are so ludicrous it becomes apparent that the actual methodology employed is:

desired conclusion -> back-logic -> necessary premises

Did it prevent 2008 happening? No, it didn't even predict it. In my view it caused it. The response that avoided depression went against its precepts.

That's not a given, it's an ideological position. A lot of taxes allows for more granular, targeted 'distortion'. That's not how they tend to be used but it should be.

Pinky's Brain is right, I don't see what's funny.

Competence, trustworthiness, and a platform you mostly agree with

Now that would be exciting! Haven't had one of those in my 57 years.

Rapid modernization in the last remaining second and third world countries is going to mean birth rates simply grind to a halt within about 20 years tops. We're not going to get anywhere near 2080 before we start shrinking in total population size.

Tom Murphy agrees with you. The UN projections have a kink which is not really justified. If you continue the current trends instead population will peak as soon as 10 years out, depending on some other assumptions.

No spending comes from taxes. Tax money is destroyed. All spending is done by issuing new money. That is the correct answer to the OP's question.

I just mean the quote in your sig is misattributed.

The New Deal has been deliberately dismantled over the last 40 years. They call it Socialism, I would call it Social Democracy.

Upton Sinclair not Sinclair Lewis.

Fingerprints have not been shown (cannot be shown?) to be unique. Compounding this problem is that, at least sometimes (I remember a UK case where the police were trying to frame a fellow policewoman), fingerprints are examined for similarities only. Differences are ignored.

Huawei is worker owned so they will take a very different view of labour 'costs' than most Capitalist enterprises.

You're at 5 Insightful so I'm going to push back a little.

The vaccines were ~90% effective at 'preventing serious illness' from the original strains. That has declined. They were mumble-mumble % effective at preventing transmission. That has probably not improved.

Since the latter is what eradicates viruses, vaccinating everyone is not going to be adequate.

From page 41 of the NGFS report:

There are a number of reasons to suggest that these are underestimates of the
potential risks. Although some studies capture non-linearities in biophysical
processes as temperatures increase, few fully capture the potential risks of
tipping points accelerating global warming. Studies that have assessed the
potential impacts from tipping points on policy responses find that emissions
prices should be up to eight times higher.