Ask Prof. Wolff

rdw_speaking.png
 
Have a question for Professor Wolff? Want to suggest a topic or article? UPVOTE your favorite questions or submit your own. Top suggestions will be given a video answer on YouTube.
 
Professor Wolff receives hundreds of questions per week covering a wide array of topics, from economics and politics, to historical movements and current events. While Professor Wolff does his best to reply to some questions on Economic Update with Richard D. Wolff, he's received more questions than can be answered individually. Prof. Wolff will now provide video answers to his favorite questions on this page.
 
Select "upvote" or "downvote" to promote certain questions. You must be logged in to vote or submit your own.
Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.

Is basic income a formidable model for rising unemployed levels?

With AI, robotics and automation rapidly being deployed across various global industries, the assumption that unemployment levels will increase dramatically seems to be a foregone conclusion. As we enter this acutely diseased phase of capitalism -- I say acutely diseased because the effect on humanity will be catastrophic -- it seems to me that discourse on this subject is severely lacking. BI (basic income) is one plausible solution. Yanis Varoufakis talks extensively about BI. My question is: in your opinion, do you feel that BI is a formidable model for rising unemployed levels and, if so, how could it be calculated to adequately support peoples' needs?

Richard Wolff posted an official response

Catherine, thank you for your question. The problem with capitalism has always been that on the one hand it stimulates tech change, although in directions that prioritize profits far too much. On the other hand, capitalism distorts the application of technical change to maintain the dominance of capital and capitalism. So if you are right about how AI, robotics, etc will reduce the need for labor (much as many earlier tech changes in capitalism did), then what capitalism will likely do is condemn millions to unemployment and all its horrors while others work overtime and the richest become richer still. A non-capitalist application of AI, robotics, etc would very differently reduce the workday for all, rather than dangerously divide populations into those workings and those living off BI etc. I would approach handling reduced need for labor without accepting the constraints of a capitalism than which the human community can do better, much better. Hope this helps, Catherine, my best.

2 comments Share

Is it true that the only way to create money is through debt?

Please review the attached documentary. Is it true that the only way to create money is through debt. Did the producer have an agenda? I feel like this is not the whole story. https://youtu.be/jqvKjsIxT_8

Richard Wolff posted an official response
Thank you for your question, Joseph. I apologize in advance I do not have the time to watch the entire video, but I will do my best to answer: Debt is the major way that money is created now chiefly by banks (when an individual or enterprise obtains a loan from a bank, the bank simply credits that person or firm's bank checking account with the amount of the loan thereby "creating" money). When governments create money they do the same thing by giving banks loans via crediting their accounts with the government with an additional sum equal to the loan. However, governments can also simply print and distribute money and/or deposit sums of new government-created money into the accounts of persons or firms. Banks have wanted to tightly control the government's money-creating powers lest governments choose ways of increasing or decreasing the money supply in an economy that do not profit banks or, worse still, hurt banks' profits. Limiting money to debt is one way of exerting such control. It is not the only or the necessary way to do it.
6 comments Share

connect